Making livestock systems comparable: the HAPPINESS framework for comparative livestock sustainability research

Summary

This historical analysis of American Society of Animal Science archives (1909–2004) examines how livestock research institutions have repeatedly recognised the challenge of generalising findings and interventions across diverse production settings, whilst often narrating this challenge from positions of disciplinary and geopolitical authority. Through systematic thematic analysis of 70 presidential addresses and interventions, the study reveals that whilst animal science leaders consistently called for broader methodological scope, synthesis, and responsiveness to global heterogeneity, these expansions were not consolidated into explicit comparative frameworks adequate to heterogeneous livestock systems or attentive to the institutional and political conditions shaping knowledge circulation. The findings highlight a persistent gap between recognised need and methodological development in comparative livestock sustainability research.

Regional applicability

This is a critical historiographic and methodological paper rooted in United States institutional history and does not present empirical livestock system data. However, its findings on the challenges of cross-system comparison and knowledge transferability are directly relevant to United Kingdom livestock research and policy contexts, where comparative benchmarking and sustainability assessment similarly require attention to institutional, political, and social conditions that enable or constrain transferability of findings across production systems.

Key measures

Recurring and contested patterns in institutional discourse on animal production as a scientific, social, ecological, and institutional problem; recognition of limits of narrow specialization; calls for broader scope and synthesis; engagement with global production contexts

Outcomes reported

The study analysed 70 historical documents from the American Society of Animal Science archive (1909–2004) to identify how institutional discourse addressed comparability and transferability of livestock research findings across diverse production settings. The analysis revealed recurring recognition of the limits of narrow specialization and fragmented problem-solving, alongside persistent gaps in developing explicit comparative methodologies adequate to heterogeneous systems.

Topic tags