This page is for producers, integrators, breeding and genetics companies, processors and buyers who want to measure welfare in their operations and supply chains and decide where to act.
WFI provides the measurement. It does not endorse companies or products, verify welfare claims, or adjust its findings for whoever funds the work. Companies use the same public estimates as researchers, regulators, funders and advocates.
The metric
Intensity and duration are estimated by synthesizing behavioural, neurophysiological, pharmacological and evolutionary evidence against defined criteria, and are expressed as probabilities across four intensity categories rather than a single value. Prevalence comes from epidemiological evidence; where data are thin, it is given as an uncertainty interval. Each parameter is treated as a hypothesis with a stated uncertainty, and is updated as evidence accumulates. The main limitations, mostly sparse data on timing and prevalence, are set out in the FAQ. The framework does not prescribe whether to improve current systems or move away from them. It makes the welfare consequences of each option comparable. The method is the same for every estimate. What varies is the scope (species, system, life stages and region), and each estimate states its boundaries.
How the framework can help
- See where welfare can be improved the most. Rank welfare problems in a system or supply chain, so investment goes where the welfare gain is largest. The result is a reform-by-reform ranking a producer can use to target investment and set targets.
- Prioritise by cost-effectiveness. Compare candidate changes by their welfare impact per unit of cost.
- Compare systems before you invest. Compare alternatives in a single unit, accounting for both negative and positive welfare experiences.
- Meet buyer, investor and reporting requirements. Retailers, investors and reporting frameworks increasingly ask for welfare information. A common welfare unit lets a company answer them with a measure that can be compared across suppliers, and helps it find and address real welfare problems in its supply chain rather than treating welfare as a reporting formality.
For example, the Welfare Footprint Framework was used to quantify the welfare impact of heat stress in South American beef cattle and to assess shade provision as a welfare intervention, including its economic returns: The Welfare Impact of Heat Stress in South American Beef Cattle and the Cost-Effectiveness of Shade Provision.
Ways to work with WFI
- Use the published estimates and the AI-Assisted Tools to produce preliminary analyses yourself. Their outputs are drafts that need expert review.
- Train your team, or work with external consultants trained by WFI.
- Support the development of estimates for the species and systems you work with.
Using the estimates responsibly
- Use estimates that fit your context. Results for one species, production system or region may not apply to another.
- Describe your analysis as informed by Welfare Footprint estimates, not endorsed or certified by WFI.
- Cite the version and date. All estimates are free to use under CC BY 4.0.
For questions about the estimates, join our Office Hours or get in touch using the form below.
Have you used the Welfare Footprint Framework or WFI's estimates? Give us your testimony.