Pig welfare compliance · Directive 2008/120/EC
Your pigs’ welfare, assessed site by site and turned into a costed action plan.
10 themes, a 5-level scale. And the action that moves each level to the next.
The framework’s 10 themes, already written from L1 to L5. One company, one business unit, or 300 at once.
Pig welfare compliance · Directive 2008/120/EC
10 themes, 5-level scale.
Nordhavn Industries
53 / 100
They measure their maturity with Datamensio
An example
This could be your situation.
Take one company as an example: three sites, three spreadsheets, no shared answer.
Nobody can consolidate.
Nordhavn Industries, 2,400 people in Hamburg, Lyon and Porto. A client asks where the group stands. Each site answers in its own spreadsheet, with its own scales.
Three weeks, a single base.
One Council Directive 2008/120/EC of 18 December 2008 laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs assessment launched across all three sites at once, from the managers’ interview notes. The framework was already written, its 10 themes and levels L1 to L5 too.
Two costs avoided before being committed.
A score of 53 out of 100, with the gap concentrated on three themes. The AI companion spotted that two actions duplicated those of another audit. The committee report took one sentence to request.
What it saved them
- 3sites measured on the same base, instead of three questionnaires to reconcile
- 2duplicate actions caught before the spend
- 1committee report, with no manual rework
These figures are an example. They could be yours.
The standard imposes processes. Datamensio says where you stand.
01
The framework is already written
Themes, questions and levels L1 to L5, all written. You do not start from an empty spreadsheet.
02
The score lands the same day
Online, by self-assessment link or in interview. Theme by theme, comparable over time.
03
The gap becomes a costed plan
Every step up carries its action. The AI prioritises on expected effect, not on the order of the standard.
04
Progress can be demonstrated
Campaign after campaign, against your target and against your own past. That is what your board asks for.
The maturity scale
One level, the next, and the action that links the two.
This mechanism, one level, the next level up, and the action that links the two, is what turns a finding into a trajectory.
Do pigs have permanent access to a sufficient quantity of manipulable materials?
- N1
No manipulable material is provided, or only occasionally in certain pens.
- N2
Materials are provided in most pens, but the quantity and replenishment depend on availability and on whoever is on duty.
- N3
A type of material is defined per animal category, distributed on a written schedule, and its presence is checked during daily rounds.
- N4
The presence and condition of materials are recorded, shortages are tracked and corrected, and effectiveness is monitored through animal based indicators such as tail lesions.
- N5
The choice of materials is reviewed periodically based on animal indicators and site trials, with documented review records and sharing across other farms.
Action to move from level 2 to level 3
Define in writing the chosen material and its quantity for each animal category, add it to the building’s daily round checklist, and train on duty staff during the weekly team meeting.
« With Datamensio, we meet our objectives far more efficiently. The ERDF inspection services and our supervising ministry particularly appreciated an approach that gives them reliable data. »
Director, CCI 94CCI Île-de-France
« We believe this is the most suitable solution to scale our transformation project and measure impact according to our needs. »
Maja SucekChief Operating Officer, Interreg Danube
Rarely on its own
Frameworks combine. Put several together to cover your business, or have the AI write yours.
Take your first measurement
What this framework covers
Directive 2008/120/EC codifies the minimum standards for the protection of pigs across the European Union. It sets minimum free floor space according to animal weight, permanent access to a sufficient quantity of manipulable materials, group housing for sows and gilts from a set period after service until one week before farrowing, a ban on tethering sows, controls on tail docking and castration, and training for anyone handling the animals. Its annexes set out requirements on lighting, noise, floors and feeding.
In practice, the difficulty is not knowing the text, it is knowing where you actually stand across a diverse estate of buildings. Is floor space per animal checked against actual pen occupancy, or calculated from an original layout that is now theoretical? Are manipulable materials permanently available and replenished, or only noted during visits? Is tail docking justified case by case, with prior corrective measures on environment and stocking density attempted beforehand, or does it remain routine practice? These questions play out differently on each site.
Two confusions come up repeatedly. The first is to treat Directive 2008/120/EC as a standalone text, when in fact it sets out, for pigs specifically, the detail underpinning the general baseline established by Directive 98/58/EC, and is enforced under Regulation (EU) 2017/625. The second is to conflate the legal requirement with retailers’ private specifications, which are often stricter on tail docking, castration or enrichment. Managing this properly means keeping the two levels of expectation separate, so that meeting one is not mistaken for meeting the other.
An official inspection ends with a finding: compliant, non compliant, formal notice. The maturity assessment answers a different question: what level of control does each practice sit at, and what specific action moves it up a level. A farm can be formally compliant on floor space and still sit at level 2 on managing manipulable materials or on documenting the justification for tail docking. It is this gap, measurable and comparable across sites, that feeds the action plan.
The framework is ready to use in Datamensio. You can adapt it: the AI adjusts the themes, questions and levels to your type of operation, farrowing, post weaning, finishing or farrow to finish, or builds a version from your own documents, internal protocols and customer specifications. Assessments are then rolled out across all sites, with benchmarking between business units and comparison against previous campaigns.
Reference standard: Council Directive 2008/120/EC of 18 December 2008 laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs
The themes assessed
Available space and stocking density
Free floor space per animal by weight category, solid floor area for sows and gilts, farrowing pen dimensions, verification of actual pen occupancy.
Group housing for sows and gilts
Compliance with the group housing period, group size, ban on tethering, layout of resting and feeding areas, management of injured animals.
Floors, layout and manipulable materials
Nature and condition of floors, width of slats and solid areas, permanent access to a sufficient quantity of manipulable materials, replenishment and monitoring.
Building environment
Temperature, ventilation, humidity levels, gas concentration, continuous noise level, duration and intensity of lighting, alarm and backup systems.
Feeding and watering
Feeding schedule, simultaneous access for rationed feeding, fibre provision for sows and gilts, permanent access to water, equipment maintenance.
Painful procedures
Controls on tail docking and tooth reduction, case by case justification and prior measures on environment and density, castration, anaesthesia and analgesia, qualification of the person performing the procedure.
Weaning and piglet management
Age at weaning and controlled exceptions, management of animal mixing, litter separation, monitoring of weak piglets and sick or injured animals.
Monitoring and care
Frequency of animal inspection, detection of tail biting and lesions, isolation and treatment, veterinary involvement, euthanasia and associated records.
Staff competence and training
Instructions and guidelines given to those handling the animals, initial and ongoing training, authorisation for procedures, monitoring of new starters.
Documentation, internal control and improvement
Records of checks, welfare indicators measured on the animal, handling of non conformities raised during official inspections or customer audits, review of practices.
A short version of the framework is available for the online self-assessment.
Frequently asked questions
Does Directive 2008/120/EC lead to certification?
No. This is a directive transposed into national law, and compliance is verified by competent authorities through official inspections. The Datamensio assessment measures your maturity level and prepares you for these inspections as well as your customers’ audits, it does not issue any certificate.
What is the difference with an official inspection or a customer audit?
An inspection ends with a binary finding on specific points. The assessment places each practice on a five level scale and identifies the action that moves it up one level. The two complement each other: the assessment prepares, the inspection validates.
How does this framework relate to Directive 98/58/EC?
Directive 98/58/EC sets the general baseline applicable to all farmed animals, Directive 2008/120/EC sets out the detail for pigs specifically. The two frameworks can be assessed separately and then consolidated into a cross cutting roadmap, without duplicating shared actions.
How long does the assessment take?
The short version takes around thirty minutes per site to complete. The full version, run collaboratively with the site manager, technician and vet, generally takes one to two weeks, most of the time being spent gathering records and carrying out in building checks.
Can the framework be adapted to our type of operation?
Yes. Themes, questions and levels can be changed, and the AI produces a version adapted to farrowing, post weaning or finishing, or incorporating your customer specifications. You can also start from your own documents to build an internal variant.
Does the assessment work across an estate of dozens of sites?
Yes. Assessments can be launched in batches across all sites or supplier farms, with a score per theme comparable from one site to another and against previous campaigns. The AI groups the gaps into a prioritised roadmap, including at group level.
How is the action plan costed?
Each gap identified opens access to the service catalogue, with cost, timeframe and expected impact on the score. Building investments and organisational actions can therefore be compared on the same basis before deciding.
Where is the data hosted?
In France, with OVH, with backup at Scaleway. No transfer outside the European Union. The AI models used can be selected, including from European providers.