There is legislation

Law 20380 of 2009 establishes in Article 2 that animals should be respected and protected as living sentient beings that are part of nature.

Article 1 says that the objective of the law is, among others, to avoid unnecessary suffering of animals.

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

The acknowledgment of animals as sentient beings appears in the introductory article of the main animal protection law in the country. It is commendable that sentience has achieved legislative status in the country and that the article is also linked to education initiatives. While the legislative introduction of the concept is extremely useful to bring animal welfare to public attention in the country, a direct link with the prosecution provisions of the law would enhance commitments and official recognition of animal sentience.  

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

There is human resource associated with the acknowledgement of animals as sentient beings, but there is no evidence of financial resource allocated for its promotion. The formula by which recognition of animal sentience appears in legislation denotes a soft commitment by the government which can be used in the implementation and development of relevant legislation and policy on animal protection. There do not appear to be significant barriers to improvement.

However, there are social barriers with respect to some categories and uses of animals, for example in relation to the use of animals for entertainment purposes that present barriers to improvement.

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

There are enforcement mechanisms for breach of the provisions of Law 20380 of 2009 that arise out of the recognition of animal sentience. 

There is full government support

The government has given full official support in principle to the Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare since 2010.

Note: The Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare is a proposed formal international acknowledgment of a set of principles giving animal welfare due recognition among governments and the international community. An expression of support for the UDAW demonstrates a government’s commitment to working with the international community to improve animal welfare.

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

The UDAW is currently the only international instrument creating a commitment for countries to acknowledge and respect animal sentience and to work towards ending cruelty and protecting the needs of animals. The government has expressed full formal support in principle for the declaration, thus helping to incorporate animal welfare into policy discussions. 

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

The declaration has been formally adopted by the relevant Ministries and authorities responsible for the foreign policy of the country, making official the country’s commitment to animal welfare. There are no significant barriers to improvement.

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

Full support has been given to the Declaration and the government has taken all the official procedures to do so.

There is legislation

Law 20380 of 2009 is the basic normativity on animal protection in the country. Article 1 of this law establishes as its objective that the law sets out rules to know, protect and respect animals as living beings and part of nature, in order to treat them adequately and without causing unnecessary distress. Article 3 includes a mandate according to which minimum conditions of care are established. 

Article 18 replaces Article 291 of the Penal Code by prohibiting acts of abuse or cruelty to animals, but this does not extend to suffering caused by failure to act.

Nevertheless, information gathered on government consultation indicates that Chilean jurisprudence has created precedent by effectively criminalising and sanctioning cases where abuse or cruelty are based on omission. The precedent continues to be applied.

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

There is acknowledgement of the issue of animal welfare in the country, and the existing legislation creates a duty of care by which people owning or taking care of an animal should act in consideration of minimum requirements for food, space and housing conditions of each species. This is in line with international standards on the subject matter.  Acts of abuse or cruelty are prohibited under Article 18. Article 3 integrates various sources including science into the standards for conditions and food for each animal, effectively showing a catalogue of ways by which the government has created a legal framework that acknowledges challenges faced by animals in the country. 

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

The legislation provides in Article 2 that relevant authorities will educate and promote measures to protect animals. It does not specify who the relevant authority is, but the legislation is linked to the Sub-secretariat of Public Health of the Ministry of Health in the country. There is no evidence, however, that the mandate is covered by a line of budget or that there are financial resources available to introduce policies covering this issue. In addition, Article 16 establishes certain restrictions to the legislation in general, based on cultural traditions or “sports” where animals are used and their welfare can be undermined.

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

Article 18 of Law 20380 of 2009 modified the existing offence in the Penal Code in Article 291 relating to cruelty towards animals.  In addition to potential fines and imprisonment, the law gives powers to judges and other relevant authorities to seize animals and order veterinary care for animals affected by cruelty behaviours.

There is legislation

Law 19162 regulates the meat industry, including making provisions for livestock rearing, slaughter and keeping conditions of livestock and livestock products.  Law 20380 of 2009 includes a series of provisions to address the welfare needs of animals used for farming, including regulations on transport of animals in Article 4 and the slaughter of animals to provide meat and other products in Article 11. Article 17 specifies that provisions in health codes and in particular those of Law 19162 need to be implemented in accordance with further animal protection legislation.

The Ministry of Agriculture has produced recent secondary legislation based on the laws above through the Agriculture and Livestock Service. Decree 28 of May 2013 establishes the conditions of rearing, husbandry, desensitising and slaughter of animals in consideration of their welfare. Decree 29 of May 2013 establishes welfare conditions of animals in industrial production and commercialisation. Decree 30 of May 2013 establishes the conditions of transport of animals used for production, complementing regulations established in Law 19162.   

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

Much of the existing legislation is very recent and takes into consideration a number of issues relevant to the welfare of animals in this category. The scope of protection is extended to a number of animals that provide for meat, which has considerable legislative development, but also animals that provide feathers, skins and other products. There is acknowledgement of the situations and activities that can undermine the welfare of these animals and a series of considerations for eliminating or alleviating actual or potential sources of suffering. In addition, the legislation mandates that people in charge of managing animals used in farming need to take a course on animal welfare, which should help to ensure that legislative protection mandates are correctly implemented and used throughout the meat industry.    

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

The existing legislation provides for human and financial resource to be allocated for the continuing development of policies and measures to protect animals under this category. There is no indication that the country has cultural or social barriers that would not allow animal welfare to be improved for this category of animals, particularly as advancements in farm animal welfare, for example, during transport and slaughter, have occurred against a background of a bilateral trade agreement between the European Union and Chile that includes animal welfare and that has stimulated the establishment of bodies within the country concerned with promoting the issue.[1]

[1] http://eurogroupforanimals.org/files/publications/downloads/EU_-_Chile_a...

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

There are enforcement mechanisms consisting of fines and imprisonment for breaches of Law 20380.

Legislation on public health provides some additional enforcement mechanisms, mostly administrative and in relation to restrictions and sanctions applicable to the meat industry. Importantly, the legislation includes capacity building mandates for employees working with animals on rearing, transporting and slaughtering animals, therefore providing additional educational tools for people directly involved in the implementation of legislative requirements. Recent Decree 28 of 2013 includes a series of guidelines and alternatives on humane methods and best practices on stunning and slaughter.

There is legislation with partial application

As a general principle, Article 3 of Law 20380 establishes that the freedom of movement of wild animals should not be unnecessarily restricted, especially if this causes suffering or alters their normal behaviour. Article 5 is more specific and provides a mandate for places keeping animals in captivity (such as circuses, zoos, laboratories, vet practices and training facilities) according to which, facilities should be in place that avoid mistreatments or abuse and that do not undermine the animals’ health. Article 4 on transport is not limited to animals used for farming and can be applied as well to animals in captivity.

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

The legislation recognises the fact that captivity can create welfare problems for animals, and as such it establishes general provisions to prevent animals to be kept in conditions that can deteriorate or undermine their welfare. Provisions cover most of the basic standards and principles on animal welfare and have focused on the idea that legislation should address the different scenarios in which animals may be held in captivity. However it is noted that the country has legitimised in law some forms of captivity that are otherwise becoming prevalently banned in other countries of the region, such as the use of animals in circuses. It would also be of benefit to address the species-specific welfare needs of animals kept in captive settings such as zoos.

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

There is evidence of human resource allocated to the implementation of this law. Article 13 establishes that the Agriculture and Livestock Service is responsible for the enactment of provisions found in Article 5. There is no evidence of financial resource allocated to the delivery of this task.

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

There are enforcement mechanisms consisting of fines and imprisonment for breaches of the anti-cruelty provisions of Law 20380, which include issues in relation to animals in this category. However there are a number of general principles for which no enforcement framework is established. 

There is legislation with partial application

Article 2 of Law 20380 establishes that education on respect for and protection of animals is to be promoted and states in paragraph 2: “Priority will be given to education on responsible ownership of animals in order to control canine and feline populations, promoting the implementation of further preventative measures, such as systematic fertility control of dogs and cats and of interrelated environmental factors and the registry and identification of these domestic animals.”

General provisions in Article 3 of the law including providing food and shelter are applicable to this category of animals. Decree 29 of 2013 includes provisions relating to shops and other commercial establishments where animals are sold and provisions aiming to protect animals from specific situations which may be detrimental to their welfare.

In July 2014 President Michelle Bachelet announced in her state-of-the-union speech a national sterilisation programme for stray dogs and a bill on responsible pet ownership envisaging tougher penalties for abuse or abandon of pets, and a planned register of dangerous dogs.[1] No evidence of such programmes was found outside the metropolitan region of Santiago.

[1] http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21603436-state-orders-sterilisati...

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

The legislation acknowledges that protection of companion animals needs to include elements of responsible care requirements for owners and guardians and also connects this idea with schemes on controlling animal population humanely by using mechanisms that have been internationally accepted as responsible and representative of maintaining good animal welfare. However the mandates are restrictive insofar as references are specific to dogs and cats and not to companion animals in general. In addition, no immediate restrictions or provisions on what constitutes “responsible ownership” are found in law. However, it appears that this may soon be addressed.[1]

There is a large population of stray or roaming dogs in the country, for example in Santiago, but the government is focussing on humane methods of population control. The government’s approach is positive and the President has made a recent call for more affordable veterinary centres where pets can be vaccinated and sterilised.[2]

[1] http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21603436-state-orders-sterilisati...

[2] http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21603436-state-orders-sterilisati...

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

Article 2 in Law 20380 identifies the relevant authority as responsible for the promotion of the mandates included in the law. Whilst there is no evidence of existing financial resource allocated to undertake such responsibilities President Bachelet has advised the government’s intention to act with respect to promotion of responsible pet ownership and a national sterilisation programme, which seems to suggest there are low barriers to progress on this issue.

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

There are enforcement mechanisms consisting of fines and imprisonment for breaches of the anti-cruelty provisions of Law 20380. It appears that there are no relevant tools to enforce the principles of care and education that are established in Article 2.

There is legislation

Article 5 of Law 20380 establishes that facilities used for shows and exhibitions of animals should have adequate conditions for their care, in particular in relation to their health. Circuses appear as an example of such facilities.

Decree 29 of 2013 includes regulation on the conditions which should be considered for animals used for exhibition and circuses.

There is no evidence of existing regulations to cater for animals used for draught and working animals in general, although the general provisions of Article 291 of the Penal Code apply.

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

The general principles of protection of Law 20380 and of Article 291 of the Penal Code are applicable to this category of animals.

Decree 29 introduces some provisions for the protection animals used in circuses and exhibitions, for instance on the form in which facilities should be kept. No specific restrictions or limitations to the use of certain species are introduced in this law, falling behind the regional trend. These factors are at odds with the idea of making the welfare of the animals covered by this indicator a mainstream concern of society. 

It is understood that wild animals are used in a number of travelling circuses in the country.[1]

[1] http://www.ad-international.org/animals_in_entertainment/go.php?id=733

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

Law 20380 does not specify financial resource allocated to the enactment and implementation of provisions relevant to this indicator. Article 13 specifies that violations to these provisions will be dealt with by the Agriculture and Livestock Service. It may be that socio-cultural attitudes towards the use of animals in entertainment present barriers with respect to preventing the use of wild animals in circuses, as recent provisions have regulated the activity but not banned it.

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

Article 13 of Law 20380 creates a special enforcement mechanism consisting of fines, which are levied by the Agriculture and Livestock Service and the Fishing Service according to the procedures established in Law 18755 and Law 18892 for aquatic species. Article 13 of Law 20380 refers to violation of Article 5 which regulates facilities used for shows and exhibitions of animals. The general provisions of Article 2 also include promotion of education and awareness measures.

There is legislation

Title IV, Articles 6-10, of Law 20380 refer to the use of animals for scientific research and educational purposes.  Procedures are only to be performed by qualified personnel, in appropriate facilities, to avoid suffering. Anaesthetics must be used during any surgical interventions (which must be performed by qualified veterinarians). The law establishes a permanent animal bioethics committee consisting of two academics, two scientists, an investigator, a representative from the Association of Veterinary Medicine and a representative of institutions for the protection of animals with national importance.  It is the duty of this committee to produce guidelines on the use of animals in research.

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

The existing legislation recognises that animals in scientific research require legislative protection and thus acknowledge these challenges as an independent issue. Article 8 of Law 20380 provides that the animal bioethics committee will produce guidelines on the use of animals in research. The legislation has created a framework by which the welfare of this category of animals is promoted and encouraged. The government is invited to build on this framework to produce detailed legislative protection for animals used in scientific research, including incorporating the principles of the Three Rs.

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

Given the scope of existing legislation on this subject, there do not appear to be significant barriers to improvement in this area.

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

Law 20380 contains general criminal enforcement mechanisms; however these refer to abuse and mistreatment of animals and there are no relevant tools to enforce the principles relevant to animals used for scientific research. Article 291 of the Penal Code could apply in cases where there is abuse during the research, beyond the remit of what is permitted by Law 20380.

There is legislation

Article 2 of Law 20293, Amendment to the General Law of Fisheries and Aquaculture in Protection of Cetaceans, prohibits the killing, hunting, capture, and other activities involved cetaceans. Article 135 of Law 18892 provides that any person who kills, hunts or captures any cetacean species shall be liable to imprisonment “in its minimum degree” and seizure without prejudice.

Law 19473 of 1996 has regulations on hunting and introduces a ban to hunt or capture threatened species and protects their nests, eggs and breed. In addition, there is a national policy on the conservation of threatened species[1], which has been in place since 2005, and earlier conservation measures to protect wildlife.[2]

Article 13A of Law 18892 of 1989, the General Law of Fisheries and Aquaculture, provides that the Secretariat of Fisheries and Aquaculture is responsible for establishing rescue procedures for aquatic animals in imminent danger of physical harm or death, unable to survive in their environment (as a result of human activities, pollution or adverse environmental factors). Article 13B provides that rehabilitation activities for aquatic animals must respect the biological characteristics and behaviour of different species and Article 135bis requires a permit in order to hold in captivity, research and rehabilitate cetacean species.

[1] http://www.cbd.int/countries/profile/default.shtml?country=cl

[2] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320796001504

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

The existing legislation does not consider the welfare of wild animals from an individual perspective but as part of the collective protection of wildlife. As such, the level of protection is limited to conservation measures and restrictions on hunting and other activities in relation to protected species. However the requirement in Article 13B of Law 18892 of 1989, that the Secretariat of Fisheries and Aquaculture must establish rescue procedures for aquatic animals in danger of harm or death because of human activity, is a positive recognition of the need to protect individual animals and may provide a useful model that could be extended also to non-aquatic wild animals.

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

Many communities rely on exploitation of Chile’s forests and wildlife for their livelihoods[1], which presents a barrier towards improving animal welfare. Socio-cultural attitudes may provide further barriers to progress. However, the government is taking measures to protect biodiversity although there are resource and enforcement challenges.[2]  

[1] http://www.cbd.int/countries/?country=cl

[2] http://www.worldwildlife.org/places/southern-chile

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

Article 135 of Law 18892 provides that any person who kills, hunts or captures any cetacean species shall be liable to imprisonment “in its minimum degree” and seizure without prejudice. Any person who possesses, transports, unloads or markets these species shall be liable to confiscation and imprisonment “in its medium degree”.

Law 19473 includes a number of enforcement mechanisms such as fines, seizures and imprisonment.

There is legislation

Article 2 of Law 20380 provides that relevant authorities will educate and promote measures to protect animals. The relevant authority is not specified, but the legislation is linked to the Sub-secretariat of Public Health of the Ministry of Health in the country.

Articles 5 and 11 state that the Agriculture and Livestock Service shall be responsible for ensuring the adequacy of facilities that house or utilise animals, ensuring the health of animals and preventing abuse, and for regulating the transport of animals.

Article 8 establishes an animal bioethics committee to produce guidelines for the ethical use of animals in scientific research. The committee functions independently to propose and evaluate policies relating to animals of this category. Article 14 assigns responsibility for addressing violations of the legislation on animal experimentation to the regional secretaries of the Ministry of Education.

An important part of the legislative protection of animals in Chile relies on the Penal Code, therefore there is a prominent role of the Public Ministry in its role of prosecution of criminal cases.

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

Animal welfare is an independent issue, recognised by legislation as such for government management and regulation. Currently, the animal protection legislation provides certain responsibility and accountability for improving animal welfare. Expansion of communication of the Ministries, as well as the establishment of a central body to ensure animal welfare policy and legislation is in line with international status, is recommended to raise societal awareness of the issue in Chile. In July 2014 President Bachelet referred to animal welfare with respect to dogs in her state-of-the-union speech, demonstrating high level government interest in the issue.[1]

Chile’s trade agreement with the European Union contains specific references to animal welfare,[2] relevant to government activities.

[1] http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21603436-state-orders-sterilisati...

[2] http://eurogroupforanimals.org/files/publications/downloads/EU_-_Chile_a...

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

The administrative framework for improving animal welfare is present, with certain responsibilities for enforcement outlined in some of the regulations, although there is some level of legal uncertainty on the financial resource allocated to the implementation of legal mandates.

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

The responsibilities of relevant government departments are mandated by legislation.

There is legislation

The government shows a high level of engagement with OIE initiatives. The veterinary services of Chile have been subjected to assessment through the OIE Performance Veterinary Services tool in 2010 and the report has been made public. Accessing the PVS facilities of the OIE and identifying gaps in capacity demonstrates a commitment to compliance with the OIE standards and engagement with the OIE as a whole.

A recent collaboration of the OIE and Chile’s Agriculture and Livestock Service took place in 2010 at ‘Focal Points Workshop on Animal Welfare’ and ‘First Meeting of the Inter-American Committee on Animal Welfare’ in Santiago, Chile.

The government reports to the OIE on animal health issues and has been successful in controlling and eradicating certain animal diseases.

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

The government of Chile has proactively engaged with the OIE to receive support and guidance on the implementation of animal welfare standards. Although a number of the OIE animal welfare standards remain unimplemented, the PVS facility is a very useful tool for assessing animal welfare in the country and ensuring that constant progress is made towards this goal. Further PVS reports, undertaken at regular intervals, would be useful for measuring progress against objectives. It is important that reports are produced according to a suitable government structure designed to monitor and continuously improve animal welfare in the country.

The government has supported the OIE in introducing and developing animal welfare measures in the country and in the region, which complies well with objectives to bring public concern to animal welfare issues.

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

The last PVS evaluation took place in 2010, outlining priorities on introduction of relevant standards of animal welfare into legislation. Research could not find any subsequent reports indicating progress towards such introductions. The OIE has advised the government on the areas deficient of international animal welfare standards. Investment by the Chilean government is recommended to ensure that all OIE standards are met to protect animal welfare.

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

There are no enforcement mechanisms relevant to this indicator.

There is legislation with partial application

A number of the OIE’s guiding principles for animal welfare are covered in the legislation.  Animal transport, slaughter, stray population control and the use of animals in scientific research are covered by various provisions in Law 20380 (Articles 2-11). Furthermore, there is specific reference to OIE standards on recent Decrees 28, 29 and 30 of 2013, which in effect means that legislation in the country has a level of equivalence to European regulations.

Article 13F of Law 18892 states that aquaculture should contemplate rules that safeguard animal welfare procedures to avoid unnecessary suffering, however, no specific regulations on the transport, stunning or slaughter of farmed fish were found.

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

The government of Chile has taken great steps in introducing recent specific legislation on animal protection which is based on references to OIE standards on animal welfare. Advances in legal protection are associated with collaborative work with the organisation.

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

Some of the guiding principles appear in legislation, and in relation to those there appears to be a level of responsibility associated to parts of the government for implementation. Given the government’s high level of engagement with the OIE, improvement should be possible.

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

Mechanisms of enforcement that appear in relevant legislation are applicable to those of the OIE’s standards which appear in that law.

There is policy

There is no requirement in legislation for the government to capture, analyse and publish information on animal welfare. However there are a number of reports produced in relation to animals used in farming. In consultation, the government has confirmed that trade with the European Union has encouraged reporting in this area.

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

There is a strong reliance on animals used for farming in the country. This reliance and the country’s trade agreements relating to animals have led to the development of some reporting on farm animal welfare issues. The government is encouraged to develop a clear strategy on animal welfare improvement and to commence regular reporting on progress towards identified goals.

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

There appears to be no human or financial resource dedicated to reporting, and no structures for data collection, analysis and publication have been found to create a management system to produce a good framework of animal protection reporting. However the existence of some reports in relation to farm animals, and the scope of engagement with the OIE on animal welfare issues in relation to livestock, suggests that further progress should be possible in this particular area. The Unit for Animal Welfare of the Agriculture and Livestock Services has taken an active role in this matter. There appear to be no restrictions for inclusion of other categories of animals in the reporting.

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

There are no enforcement mechanisms relevant to this indicator.

There is legislation

Law 20380 establishes in Article 2 that basic and middle level education must teach a sense of respect and protection for animals “as living, sensitive beings that are part of nature.”

There are 32 veterinary schools in Chile.[1] Animal welfare has been emphasised as a matter of education within the curricula of veterinary schools in Chile in the past 10 years. However, only a small number of the schools offer animal welfare as a mandatory course for veterinary students.

[1] Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas [INE]. VII Censo Nacional Agropecuario. Santiago, Chile: Ministry of

Agriculture, 2009.

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

The government has introduced legislation according to which educational programmes for different levels (basic to secondary) are required to include animal welfare as an issue. This would contribute positively to discussions on animal welfare at high government levels. However no evidence of the inclusion of animal care and protection in compulsory education was identified in the preparation of this report.

Animal welfare programmes targeting teachers of students aged from 5 to 16 have been established in the country by NGOs, showing that there is some government support of humane education.[1]

Through focusing on the benefits for humans of abiding by animal welfare standards, as well as an understanding of the purpose of abiding by welfare requirements, Chile should be able to continue its progress and improve its stance as an international leader in animal welfare.

[1]http://www.worldanimalprotection.cr/ayuda/emprenda_acciones/prueba_tridi...

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

A government body responsible for implementing animal welfare education in the curriculum is not specified in the legislation, and no evidence of Ministry of Education involvement in animal welfare education has been found. No financial resources have been assigned to integrating animal care and protection into the national education system. This suggests that, despite the mention of humane education in legislation, there are barriers to the effective implementation of this requirement.

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

Although the requirement for humane education is mandated by legislation, this is not precise or detailed and does not identify a responsible government body for implementation.

There is legislation with partial application

A permanent animal bioethics committee is appointed under legislation to compose guidelines for the use of animals in scientific research and education. The committee consists of two academics, two scientists, an investigator, a representative from the Association of Veterinary Medicine and a representative of institutions for the protection of animals with national importance.

In relation to animals used in production, Decrees 28, 29 and 30 of 2013 require engagement with the private sector to produce guidelines on best practice for animal welfare, which includes courses to build capacity on animal welfare issues for animal handlers in the industry. 

Outside of these two categories of animals, there is no clear policy or legislation requiring that the government seek to engage with stakeholders and NGOs in order to improve the protection for animals. However, the government is involved in collaboration with the European Union concerning animal welfare at institutional and academic levels and a number of seminars have been organised.[1] For example, in 2010 a seminar on animal welfare in intensive and production systems was organised by the Universidad de Chile (Veterinary Faculty) and the Livestock and Agriculture Service of Chile, with the support of the European Commission.[2]

[1] http://eurogroupforanimals.org/files/publications/downloads/EU_-_Chile_a...

[2] http://eurogroupforanimals.org/files/publications/downloads/EU_-_Chile_a...

Are legal provisions effective in acknowledging animal welfare as a mainstream concern?

The support of relevant stakeholders in implementing the legislation relating to the welfare of animals used in research is a positive step towards making the welfare of these animals a mainstream concern of society. The addition of policy or legal provisions requiring engagement with relevant stakeholders in decision-making in the legislative development process is encouraged to provide expertise in the subject across all categories of animals and to promote animal protection in the country, mirroring the positive and proactive engagement that has been reached with animals used for production.

Are there economic and societal barriers to improving animal welfare in the country?

There is no central body specifically responsible for working to improve general animal welfare at a national level. However, the Agriculture and Livestock Service has a dedicated unit for Animal Welfare which engages fully with relevant stakeholders for the production of normativity.

Despite the lack of legal or policy requirement for stakeholder consultation (other than in relation to animals used for production or scientific research), the government has shown some desire to engage with relevant parties and this suggests that improvement should be possible.

Are enforcement mechanisms in place in policy and legislation?

The requirement for stakeholder engagement in relation to animals used for scientific research and livestock regulations is mandated by legislation.