Intensive animal farming is not bad for the planet or animal welfare. On the contrary, it offers many undeniable environmental and animal benefits.

As long as we continue to argue that large ‘intensive’ farms are the problem and hope for their closure, nothing good will come of this for the planet and humanity. The text of the latest proposal, which was drafted in this spirit, rightly aims to favour production that uses fewer resources and has a reduced environmental, social and health impact. Unfortunately, small livestock farms do not have these qualities. In fact, large farms that are the most efficient and equipped with the most advanced technologies allow us to produce a lot of food with few inputs, protect animal welfare with smart devices and operate in a circular economy, turning waste into resources.

The most “knowledge-intensive” farms are also the most “ecologically intensive”, so it would be more correct to speak of the “ecological intensification” of farms. It is right to recognise a fair price for small producers and to guarantee consumers access to healthy food. Still, it is wrong to continue to believe that large farms cannot offer quality food and to consider them negatively. Today, it would be better to define “intensive” farms as “protected, controlled and precision farms” because they can guarantee the highest levels of biosecurity and optimise the use of resources, unlike small extensive farms.

#IntensiveFarms are #protected, controlled and #PrecisionFarming places because they can guarantee the highest levels of #biosecurity and #efficiency. Click To Tweet

In fact, on a small open-air farm, there is less control over the animal, less chance of recovery from disease, exposure to bad weather and predators, and possible inadequate food availability. It is also no longer environmentally sustainable as it requires more space, water, and resources and is less controllable in terms of biosecurity. On the other hand, “intensive” farming is more efficient and more sustainable, thanks to technological advances that allow, for example, precise nutrition adapted to each species, which leads to a better conversion index of plant food into meat, significantly reducing waste and, therefore, environmental impact.

Even higher-density farming can provide space, natural light, air exchange, daily care for each animal, innovative housing systems and ‘smart’ equipment that monitors the welfare of each animal and alerts the farmer at the first sign of something wrong so he can intervene quickly. Large farms are also the most circular, with large plants that can turn wastewater into biogas, providing clean, renewable energy and manure into natural fertiliser for the farm, avoiding the need for polluting chemical fertilisers.

Promoting the closure of intensive livestock farms or the introduction of pointless meat-free weeks only jeopardises food safety and public health. On the other hand, “ecologically intensive farming” is the most appropriate and sensible solution to respond efficiently to the growing global demand for food, and this is what we must hope for today because it is the only way to achieve a good compromise between animal welfare, productivity and environmental sustainability.