Since the 1970s, intensive chicken farming in Europe has faced mounting public criticism for its negative impact on animal welfare. While the European Union eventually set minimum legal standards, many people felt these rules were insufficient to protect birds. In response, various extensive systems, which use slower-growing breeds and lower stocking densities, began to emerge in specific countries, such as the Netherlands, Germany, and France.

To unify these efforts and raise the bar across the entire continent, a group of 30 non-profit organizations established the European Chicken Commitment (ECC) in 2016. Also known as the Better Chicken Commitment (BCC), this policy provides a set of welfare standards that companies can commit to meeting. It requires companies to use slower-growing breeds and provide birds with more space, natural light, and environmental enrichment. The ECC acts as a “middle segment,” bridging the gap between conventional and organic production systems. This study evaluates the trade-offs of this transition across three main areas: economics, the environment, and food safety.

The study aimed to provide an independent view of these aspects, filling gaps left by previous industry-commissioned research. The researchers focused on six major chicken-producing European countries: Poland, Germany, Spain, France, Italy, and the Netherlands. They used 2024 as the base year for calculations.

The team compared conventional systems, typically using fast-growing Ross 308 birds at stocking densities up to 42 kilograms per square meter with the ECC system, which uses medium-slow-growing Hubbard Redbro birds at a maximum density of 30 kilograms per square meter (see the table below).

*Thinning involves removing a proportion of the flock for earlier slaughter. Farmers often use it even though the ECC discourages it.

Environmental impacts were measured using a life cycle assessment tracking the production chain from the breeding stage to the slaughterhouse gate. The researchers measured food safety by calculating the amount of antibiotics administered (“defined daily dosages”) to conventional versus slower-growing flocks. Both the environmental impacts and antibiotic use were based on data just from the Netherlands, not the other five countries.

Economic Impacts And Cost Drivers

Switching to the ECC standard significantly increases the cost of producing meat across all analyzed countries. On average, the production costs of the conventional system vary between 99 cents in Poland and 107 cents in Germany per kilogram of live weight. In contrast, ECC production costs range from 117 cents in Poland to 127 cents in Germany. When averaged across all six countries, the transition to ECC results in a 18.5% increase in costs at the farm level, a 16% increase after slaughter, and a 19% increase after further processing into consumer meat products.

The researchers identified three primary drivers for these higher costs. Feed costs rise because slower-growing birds have a higher feed conversion rate, meaning they require more feed to reach the same weight as conventional birds. For example, the rate for Redbro birds was 14% higher than for Ross 308 birds. Housing and labor costs also increase because the lower stocking densities increase these costs per bird.

Environmental Consequences

While the ECC improves the welfare of individual chickens, it generally results in a higher environmental footprint per kilogram of live weight. Total greenhouse gas emissions, including those from land use change, were 6% higher for ECC at the farm level compared to conventional systems. After slaughter, this increase rose to 7%, and after processing, 11%. This can be attributed to the higher feed conversion rate of slower-growing birds.

Land use and nutrient excretion also saw significant increases. Land use, which is tied to the production of feed ingredients, was 14% higher per kilogram of meat for ECC birds due to their higher total feed intake.

Phosphorus excretion was also much higher for ECC birds — an increase of 37% per kilogram of meat. This is because the birds consume more phosphorus through their feed while retaining the same amount as conventional birds as they’re both slaughtered at the same weight.

Significant Gains In Food Safety

The most striking positive result of the study was the impact of the transition on antibiotic use, which serves as a key indicator for food safety. Data from the Netherlands between 2022 and 2024 showed that the number of defined daily dosages per animal was 10 to 12 for conventional flocks but below 2 for slower-growing flocks. This suggests that a transition to ECC could reduce the use of antibiotics by 80% to 85%.

These health benefits are likely due to a combination of slower growth rates and lower stocking densities, which reduce susceptibility to intestinal diseases and mortality. In 2024, 96% of slower-growing flocks in the Netherlands weren’t treated with antibiotics at all, compared to only 77% of fast-growing flocks. This finding suggests that shifting to higher welfare standards can significantly benefit both bird health and the broader goal of reducing antibiotic resistance.

Study Limitations

It’s important to note that the detailed environmental and food safety data were calculated specifically for the situation in the Netherlands. While the economic parameters were calculated for the six countries, some assumptions were required for ECC-approved breeds. Specifically, because breeds like the Redbro aren’t yet used on a large scale in all countries, the researchers estimated slaughter yields based on data from other similar slow-growing and fast-growing breeds.

What This Means For Advocates

For animal advocates, this report provides a comprehensive view of the practical trade-offs involved in middle-segment production systems. Advocates should be prepared to address the reality that higher welfare standards often lead to a higher environmental footprint per kilogram of meat due to reduced feed efficiency and lower yields.

However, the massive reduction in antibiotic use — as much as 85% — is a powerful tool for advocacy. Linking animal welfare to public health through the reduction of antibiotic-resistant bacteria can engage a wider audience, including those who may not prioritize animal welfare alone.

Ultimately, this study highlights the complexity of balancing animal welfare with environmental sustainability goals.

This summary was drafted by a large language model (LLM) and closely edited by our Research Library Manager for clarity and accuracy. As per our AI policy, Faunalytics only uses LLMs to summarize very long reports (50+ pages) that are not appropriate to assign to volunteers, as well as studies that contain graphic descriptions of animal cruelty or animal industries. We remain committed to bringing you reliable data, which is why any AI-generated work will always be reviewed by a human.