Compassion in World Farming (CIWF) was founded in 1967 by British dairy farmer Peter Roberts, distressed by the spread of intensive factory farming—the world's first organization devoted solely to farm-animal welfare. Worldwide, about 50 billion animals a year are raised and slaughtered in factory farms, many spending their whole lives in extreme suffering. Flying the banner of ending factory farming, the greatest cause of animal suffering, CIWF works not through direct rearing but through policy advocacy, corporate engagement and campaigns aimed at the key actors—governments, companies, the UN and finance. It works to abolish cages and crates and to correct inhumane practices such as long-distance live-animal transport, preventive octopus farming, shrimp eyestalk ablation and pig tail-docking. With tracking tools like EggTrack and ChickenTrack, it publishes annually whether companies keep their cage-free and other commitments, pushing implementation. It has drawn out over 2,500 cage-free pledges, benefits reaching 112 million laying hens a year, and the historic pledge of the EU's 2027 cage ban.
●●○ medium
There is no confirmed −; independently verified + decide the position (B). No unreachable strike-through.= non-additive meter
Compassion in World Farming: Ending factory farming—a life without cages. The letter is B; certainty is medium. Unconfirmed concerns are placed under “Watching.” (As of 2026-Q3; estimate based on public information.)
Main narrative
One person’s story (N1)
+ A single story
A single laying hen who would have spent her whole life in an overcrowded cage without even a perch, beset by health and mobility problems—this is factory farming's default course. Through corporate cage-free pledges that CIWF tracks and pushes, major retailers' and food companies' supply chains shift to cage-free rearing, and that hen lives outside the cage. The benefit appears as a collective: over 2,500 pledges cumulatively, reaching 112 million laying hens a year.
Source nature: Compassion in World Farming(EggTrack) / P1 First-party / independent (tracking tool). Positive effects are not used to offset negatives.
Positive / negative effects
+ effects
- Founded in 1967 by dairy farmer Peter Roberts, the world's first organization devoted to farm-animal welfare. It advances the end of factory farming through policy + corporate engagement + campaigns. Prioritizing broilers (95% of factory-farmed animals), it promotes and tracks corporate cage-free/crate-free/Better Chicken Commitments. It drew out the EU's 2027 cage ban.P2 Independent (third-party) / Sentient Media／Animal Charity Evaluators
− effects (confirmed)
- No confirmed −.
- A
- d
- v
- o
- c
- a
- c
- y
- w
- i
- t
- h
- i
- n
- d
- i
- r
- e
- c
- t
- e
- f
- f
- e
- c
- t
- (
- r
- e
- a
- c
- h
- i
- n
- g
- a
- n
- i
- m
- a
- l
- s
- v
- i
- a
- c
- o
- r
- p
- o
- r
- a
- t
- e
- /
- p
- o
- l
- i
- c
- y
- p
- l
- e
- d
- g
- e
- s
- )
- ,
- h
- a
- r
- d
- t
- o
- a
- t
- t
- r
- i
- b
- u
- t
- e
- t
- o
- t
- h
- e
- w
- h
- o
- l
- e
- m
- o
- v
- e
- m
- e
- n
- t
- ;
- s
- o
- m
- e
- c
- a
- g
- e
- -
- f
- r
- e
- e
- p
- l
- e
- d
- g
- e
- s
- u
- n
- f
- u
- l
- f
- i
- l
- l
- e
- d
- ;
- a
- n
- i
- m
- a
- l
- w
- e
- l
- f
- a
- r
- e
- i
- s
- a
- v
- a
- l
- u
- e
- -
- l
- a
- d
- e
- n
- f
- i
- e
- l
- d
- .
- Monitoring full fulfillment of cage-free pledges; expanding to broilers (Better Chicken Commitment), pigs, fish, octopus, etc.; implementing the EU cage ban (2027); shifting from factory farming to regenerative agriculture.
A second look
The plus is a structural welfare effect on farm animals under factory farming, the greatest source of animal suffering—cage/crate abolition and improved rearing (Animals)—and reducing factory farming also reaches climate and nature (Nature). Backed by work since 1967, EggTrack traceability, the scale of benefits to 112 million hens a year, the EU cage ban and about 90% pledge fulfillment, and Effective Altruism/Open Phil rating it among the most cost-effective interventions. Caveats: it is an advocacy organization whose effect is indirect (reaching animals via corporate/policy pledges), hard to attribute to the movement as a whole; some pledges are unfulfilled and need monitoring; and animal welfare is a value-laden field. Recognizing the genuine, traceable, large-scale plus but noting the indirectness, B/medium rather than A/high.
Sources
How to read this assessment
- Reachable upper bound (ceiling): a confirmed − sets the ceiling, and independently verified + decide the position within it. + do not cancel out −.
- The weight of evidence is not symmetric: only confirmed − are counted; the volume of disputes or allegations goes under “Watching.” + are counted from independent evidence, while an organization’s own PR is treated as “reference.”
- Size is not value: scale is not used in the assessment. Matters that stay within money or competition—investors, shareholders, sanctions, trade secrets—are also excluded.
- The letter (assessment) and certainty (how reliable the information is) are separate axes.
This is a translation; the Japanese version is authoritative. The assessments here are generated automatically by AI based on published criteria. The operator does not alter individual results. Because they are AI-generated they may contain errors, and they are opinion and commentary, not statements of fact. Where evidence is insufficient, the entry is marked “On hold.” Requests for correction are accepted via the form.
Terms: Narrative Value = an assessment (A–G) of the distance between the narrative an organization tells and its reality / Ceiling meter = a visualization of the reachable upper bound / Watching = unconfirmed matters not counted / Protected stakeholders = people, animals, nature, and future generations. | Generated by: AI | As of: 2026-Q3 | Back to top