Mieux Donner

Donate
Rangées de poules en cages dans une salle fermée

Intensive and extensive livestock farming: definitions and differences

Picture of Camille Berger

Camille Berger

Project Manager, Mieux Donner
Reading time: 8 min.

1. Definition

Intensive livestock farming is a method of farming that aims to maximise productivity while minimising production costs, and its development has responded to the growing demand for animal products, guaranteeing an abundant supply at affordable prices. However, this approach is the subject of much debate, particularly because of its environmental impact, animal suffering and the associated health consequences. This method emerged at the end of the Second World War, in response to the growing need for agricultural production.

2. Caractéristiques

Intensive livestock farming, also known as factory farming, is characterised by a high density of animals in restricted spaces, massive use of concentrated feed and modern technologies such as mechanised feeding and manure management. It concerns the overwhelming majority of animals, with 95% or more of rabbits, pigs, turkeys, trout, 80% of chickens, 70% of guinea fowl, 60% of goats and 54% of laying hens [1].

Unlike extensive livestock farming, which provides access to pasture, intensive livestock farmers favour short, optimised production cycles. Intensive farms often concentrate on chickens, pigs and other animals reared in confinement, which encourages rapid growth but limits the animals’ natural behaviour. This type of farming aims to maximise profitability while meeting the growing demand for animal products.

The result poses a dizzying problem in terms of animal welfare: researchers from the Welfare Footprint Project [2] have estimated that a single chicken in this type of system spends an average of 4,000 hours in painful suffering, and more than 400 hours in incapacitating suffering, a notch higher. In total, there are 90 billion farmed land animals on earth, almost all of them in intensive farming, including 80 billion chickens [1].

3. Alternatives and comparison with extensive livestock farming

Cage bans

Not all interventions to reduce the impact of intensive livestock farming are equal, but some are remarkably effective, delivering exceptional impact for a given amount of resources. Typically, hens make up 90% of the world’s farmed animals, and getting them out of cages is easily achievable through awareness-raising campaigns. The Humane League is an association that promotes the end of intensive farming of laying hens, in particular by defending the end of caged hens and obese chickens selected for accelerated growth.

Every 100 euros donated to The Humane League saves 117 animals from intensive farming [3].

Alternative proteins

Another alternative is to speed up the transition to plant-based proteins: the main reason for the existence of livestock farming is the high demand for meat. By creating plant-based alternatives that are competitive in terms of price and taste, we can satisfy demand while reducing the number of animals reared, and emitting fewer greenhouse gases. The Good Food Institute is one of the leading associations in this field.

Pictogramme représentant la terre et un thermomètre

For every 100 euros donated, you save 100 tonnes of carbon [4], and 530 animals from intensive farming [ 5].

Extensive livestock farming

Extensive farming is a more conventional solution: it relies on natural pastures and causes less animal suffering, but its yield is a little lower and its cost a little higher – often ofthe order of a few cents or tens of cents, but enough to make farmers lose out on competition. In France, some cattle farms combine the two models to reduce their environmental impact while remaining productive. Extensive dairy farming, for example, helps to preserve the environment, with less suffering for dairy cows and calves.

4. History of intensive livestock farming

Intensive livestock farming practices emerged at the end of the Second World War, marked by the need to rapidly increase animal production. This model became industrialised, particularly in the United States and Europe, before gradually being adopted by developing countries. Technological innovation and agricultural policies played a key role in this expansion.

The use of antibiotics has made it possible to improve the performance of livestock farming, but their excessive use is now giving rise to health concerns, particularly because of antibiotic resistance and the risk of a pandemic.

5. Main characteristics of intensive livestock farming

  • High animal density: laying hens in cages, pigs in confinement, quails in factory farms. The animals are confined, and their movements are restricted by facilities that allow them to fit on as little floor space as possible. They may suffer stress as a result.

  • Specialised feed: Animals are fed GMOs, animal meal, nitrogen-rich feed supplements and chemical fertilisers.

  • Automation and mechanisation: Feed is distributed automatically, temperature is controlled, and fattening is carried out as quickly as possible. Many animals are actually slaughtered when they are still juveniles.

  • Short-cycle production: Animals are selected to grow as fast as possible, giving them a crippling shape. Farmed chickens are generally unable to walk without pain, and cannot stand up if they fall on their backs.

  • Environmental impact: This model consumes a lot of resources, and causes pollution of water and soil, including groundwater, from manure and slurry. It emits more greenhouse gases than plant-based agriculture, contributing between 10 and 20% of total emissions. Intensive livestock farming contributes to deforestation to grow soya, almost all of which is used for animal feed.

  • Impact on public health: This system poses more health risks than the alternatives, particularly zoonoses. Because animals are concentrated in high densities and eat the same food, disease transmission occurs much more rapidly, sometimes threatening to contaminate the outside world. This increases the risk of pandemics. Breeders often administer antibiotics, which has the effect of increasing antibiotic resistance. The public still remembers the mad cow crisis, when a neurodegenerative disease spread among cattle and threatened human populations.

6. Why do some farmers choose intensive farming?

Despite its negative aspects, this method is still widespread. In order to identify solutions that could replace it, we need to understand the motivations behind it:

  • Economic efficiency: raising animals costs money and requires considerable investment. Intensive livestock farming allows a higher margin to be extracted.

  • Security: the supply of meat, milk and eggs remains constant once a farm is up and running. This gives farmers a sense of security.

  • Stable supply: This model now offers the capacity to meet global needs, as highlighted by the FAO. This encourages governments to subsidise their activity.

For an alternative to be viable, it must respond to these motivations, saving money, providing a constant flow and ensuring economic stability for producers.

7. Current regulations and initiatives

Les réglementations européennes encadrent le bien-être animal et la gestion des effluents des exploitations agricoles. Des projets comme le European Chicken Commitment tentent de pousser les standards de bien-être encore plus haut. Des labels tels que le bio ou le Label Rouge tente de garantir des pratiques plus responsables, mais demeurent vivement critiqués. Les ONG, à l’image de The Humane League, militent pour des conditions d’élevage plus éthiques. Le Good Food Institute, de son côté, promeut des protéines alternatives, qui permettent de diminuer progressivement l’exploitation animale et les émissions de gaz à effet de serre.

8. Future prospects

Given the worrying state of the sector, a number of changes are needed:

  • More sustainable agricultural production: It is important to reduce the environmental impact of farms and to manage nitrogen emissions.

  • Commitment and regulation : Initiatives such as those promoted by The Humane League, the European Chicken Commitment, the Better Chicken Commitment and many others help to promote better conditions for animals.

  • Alternative feed: Alternative proteins, promoted by organisations such as the Good Food Institute, considerably reduce the need for intensive livestock farming and greenhouse gas emissions.

  • The role of consumers: Even if giving up meat is too difficult, you can shift your demand towards ethical products from more environmentally-friendly livestock farming.

9. Conclusion

Intensive livestock farming remains a dominant but controversial model. Its environmental and ethical impact means that we need to move towards more sustainable practices. The future lies in reconciling human, animal and environmental needs, in particular through a more plant-based diet.

With this in mind, it is essential to rethink our consumption patterns in order to limit water pollution, deforestation, the negative effects on the soil and animal suffering, while ensuring that our food is fit for the times. If you would like to get involved now, Mieux Donner can advise you on how to donate on the issue of animal welfare.

See our Top Charities

[1] Rapport du Welfare Footprint Project

[2] Statistiques de la FAO

[3] Charity Review : The Humane League (Animal Charity Evaluators) [Consulté le 11/07/2024]

[4] The Good Food Institute, Deep Dive (Giving Green)  [Consulté le 11/07/2024].
La meilleure estimation de Giving Green pour la rentabilité de GFI est de 2,98 $ par tonne métrique d’équivalent CO2 dans l’attente. (Nous avons utilisé une conversion prudente de 2,98 $ pour 3 euros).


[5] Calculs d’analyse du rapport coût-efficacité pour les organisations de protection des animaux (FarmKind) [Consulté le 11/07/2024].
Veuillez noter que le chiffre de 5,3 animaux aidés par euro est très incertain et que nous ne serions pas surpris de constater une différence d’une certaine ampleur dans le chiffre réel. Les détails complets des hypothèses et des chiffres utilisés pour les calculs de FarmKind sont présentés dans leur feuille de calcul. (Par prudence, nous avons utilisé une conversion de 1 dollar en 1 euro)

 

Vous pourriez également aimer lire...

Illustration : évaluation incertaine de l'impact climatique des dons, entre modélisation et transparence sur le coût par tonne de CO2
Ombline Planes

Elementor #34549

Assessing the climate impact of donations: between modelling and uncertainty At Mieux Donner, we sometimes use a calculation that is strikingly simple: “€1 = 1

Read More »
April 9, 2026
Tags :