Definition of animal breeding goals for sustainable production systems1 I. Olesen*,2, A. F. Groen���, and B. Gjerde* *AKVAFORSK, Institute of Aquaculture Research AS, N-1432 As, �� Norway and ���Animal Breeding and Genetics Group, Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen Agricultural University, NL-6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands ABSTRACT: What we do is determined by the way we ���view��� a complex issue and what sample of issues or events we choose to deal with. In this paper, a model based on a communal, cultural, or people-centered worldview, informed by a subjective epistemology and a holistic ontology, is considered. Definitions and inter- pretations of sustainable agriculture are reviewed. Common elements in published definitions of sustain- able agriculture and animal production among those who seek long-term and equitable solutions for food production are resource efficiency, profitability, produc- tivity, environmental soundness, biodiversity, social vi- ability, and ethical aspects. Possible characteristics of future sustainable production systems and further de- velopment are presented. The impact of these charac- teristics on animal breeding goals is reviewed. The need for long-term biologically, ecologically, and sociologi- Key Words: Animal Breeding, Breeding Objectives, Sustainability, Ethics ���2000 American Society of Animal Science. All rights reserved. J. Anim. Sci. 2000. 78:570���582 Introduction The Convention on Biological Diversity has three principal objectives: the conservation of the world���s bio- logical diversity, sustainable use of its components, and fair and equitable sharing of the benefits to be derived from its use. This convention was signed by 157 coun- tries at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 and came into force as an internationally legally binding law. However, the im- pact of sustainable use of domestic animal genetic re- 1Presented at the 49th Annu. Mtg. of the European Association for Animal Production, August 24���27, 1998, Warsaw, Poland. The financial support provided by the Norwegian Research Council (Grant no. 122859/122) is acknowledged and appreciated. The authors grate- fully acknowledge the many useful comments and suggestions of U. Bren��e, E. Kanis, S. Newman, and T. Steine. 2To whom correspondence should be addressed: P.O. Box 5010 (phone: +47 64 94 95 00 fax: +47 64 94 95 02 E-mail: ingrid. olesen@akvaforsk.nlh.no). Received March 10, 1999. Accepted September 2, 1999. 570 cally sound breeding goals is emphasized, because ani- mal breeding determined only by short-term market forces leads to unwanted side effects. Hence, a proce- dure for defining animal breeding goals with ethical priorities and weighing of market and non-market val- ues is suggested. Implementation of non-market as well as market economic trait values in the aggregate geno- type, as suggested, may allow for breeding programs that contribute to sustainable production systems. Ex- amples of breeding goals in salmon, cattle, and pigs are given, and the resulting genetic responses are evalu- ated with respect to economic profit (or costs) and other criteria of sustainability. Important prerequisites for breeding programs for sustainable production are ap- propriate governmental policies, awareness of our way of thinking, and a more communal worldview informed by a subjective epistemology and a holistic ontology. sources for animal breeding is still rather unclear. The objective of this paper is to discuss defining animal breeding goals for sustainable production systems. As an introduction to this complex area of research and practical management, a general philosophy and major patterns of development that have led to the current situation of agriculture and animal production systems is described. Also, a model of different perspectives, worldviews informed by a specific ontology (the way we see nature) and epistemology (the way we try to learn about nature), is described. The definition of sus- tainability is discussed, and future trends and conse- quences for animal breeding goals are given. The gen- eral conclusions of the paper are illustrated with exam- ples in cattle, fish, and pig breeding. General Philosophy Evolution of Agriculture and Animal Production Systems Bawden (1989) described four phases of evolution in agriculture and animal production systems: pioneering,

Breeding goals for sustainable production 571 production, productivity, and persistency. When culti- vating land, pioneering was an innovative and uncer- tain activity with a trial-and-error approach using sim- ple technologies. Subsistence agriculture for meeting the immediate needs of the family was the main objec- tive. Mysticism, intuition, and experience helped the pioneers in farming. During the 17th century, scientists such as Galileo Galilei, Nicolaus Copernikus, Johannes Kepler, and Isaac Newton succeeded in predicting the planets��� movements by mathematical formulas. This formed the basis for a mechanistic worldview. Rene�� Descartes was one of the important philosophers who agreed that the world was like a machine that we could control. During the middle of the 19th century, Charles Darwin, Louis Pasteur, and Gregor Mendel contributed to the development of the science of nature and agricul- ture. Production from crops and animals could be in- creased using scientific principles. From around 1950, mechanization, fertilization, and crop and animal breeding provided the technology to increase produc- tion. Economic theories were developed and widely ap- plied. Also, specialized educational and research insti- tutions were established during this phase. In the de- veloped world, fewer and fewer farmers were needed to produce more and more output. When the problems with overproduction became an obvious paradox, the focus changed from maximization of yield to optimization of return, from gross production to efficiency of production. During this productivity phase, interaction between the production components and inputs and outputs became more important. Ag- ricultural economics and farm management became im- portant disciplines to meet the increasing demands for lower food prices, higher short-term profit, and im- proved efficiency. Mechanization, chemical inputs, im- proved genetic material, and advances in pests and dis- ease control contributed to increased productivity of the farms. Having experienced the negative environmental, so- cial, and ethical side effects of a strong and narrow- minded focus on efficiency and productivity, a phase of persistency or sustainability started around 1970 with protection of the environment, natural resources, and animal welfare as main objectives. The methods of learning and science that were used in the phases of pioneering, production, and productiv- ity have proved to be inadequate to handle the complex- ity and change associated with contemporary agricul- ture (Bawden, 1991b). We need other, new ways of learning and dealing with problems in addition to those forms that helped us in the past to be able to develop sustainable production systems with, for example, ap- propriate animal breeding programs and breeding goals. Bawden (1989, 1991b) argued that there will not be much change in the situation until all the stakehold- ers are prepared to adopt perspectives on agriculture and nature different from those that currently prevail. A Model of Perspectives Sriskandarajah and Bawden (1994) proposed a model of perspectives, worldviews, that is based on the ideas promoted by Bateson (1972), Checkland (1981), Cot- grove (1982), and Bawden (1989). Two aspects of philos- ophy that are important for understanding different perspectives are considered here: ontology and episte- mology. The first is our ontology: our belief about what nature is. An extreme ontology of reductionism is a highly frag- mented view of nature. Here, the whole is believed to equal the sum of its parts, such that if we know enough about the component parts (e.g., plants, animals, land, water, and air) we can put them all together in the end and understand the whole. Hence, each part can be studied and manipulated in isolation from any other without problems. We may, for example, look at the development of highly industrial and specialized pig and poultry production with long-distant transport of feeds as a result of the reductionistic view of nature. Transportation and huge amounts of nutrients concen- trated in a limited area carry with them big environ- mental problems and, often, reduced resource effi- ciency. Further negative effects on animal health and welfare, increased drug consumption, and development of resistant bacteria have been experienced in such pro- duction systems. An example of reductionistic thinking in animal breeding is the generally applied principle that we can change characteristics of animals indepen- dently from other characteristics. The extensive work on QTL and major gene detection we see now is to a large extent based on the belief that there is little or no epistatic interaction and undesirable associations between genes. This is another current expression of this philosophy of reductionism. The opposite belief is that all plants and animals are dependent on each other and closely integrated with the land, water, and air around them. In this ontology of holism, any change in one part will have a significant impact on the other parts as well as on nature as a whole. For example, organic farming is more based on a holistic view, emphasizes practices that favor the de- sirable interactions between different elements on the farm, and avoids negative side effects on other natural components. This prevents unbalances and problems that may require short-term solutions with long-term negative side effects. Striving for a balance between the herd size and the feed production on the farm will, for example, restrict the amount of nutrient concentra- tion and leakage, the extent of monocultures, and hence the need for, as an example, pesticide spraying and drug treatments. The second aspect of philosophy is our epistemologi- cal position, or how we try to learn about nature: our ways of analyzing things. At one extreme, we believe we exist in a world of objective reality. We can see the world in a detached, analytical way, and therefore we can find out everything that can ever be known about