The livestock sector faces major challenges. Digitalisation offers the potential to support and relieve the burden on farmers as they work towards an animal-welfare-friendly, labour-efficient and resource-conserving agricultural sector. Digital technology should not, and cannot, replace people; rather, it should serve as a tool to aid decision-making and implementation, as well as making their work easier.

Alongside the structural changes in the agricultural sector (Table 1) over the past century, technological advancements have also taken place. As part of this, digitalisation in agriculture in general, and in cattle farming in particular, has gained momentum in recent years. A significant step in this regard was the introduction of automatic milking systems (AMS), first presented in 1989 and installed in a dairy barn for the first time in 1992. 

Table 1: Agriculture in transition – Agricultural holdings have become significantly larger and support significantly more people; however, due to the greater efficiency of processes and the increasing level of automation, fewer workers are required to achieve this. (DBV 2025; BZL 2024; BMEL 2022, Deter 2016).

Digitalisation offers potential for optimising cattle farming in various areas, such as improving efficiency, conserving resources and animal health (Table 2). At the same time, however, there are also risks – for example, regarding costs, data protection and operational security – which need to be minimised (Table 2). A vast majority of farms (79%) consider the opportunities presented by digitalisation to outweigh the risks (Bitkom Research 2024).

Table 2: Opportunities and risks associated with the use of digital technologies and processes in livestock farms. 

As a result of the use of digital technology, vast amounts of data are collected, stored and processed. A question that frequently arises in this context is that of ownership rights to one’s own data or to data collected within one’s own business.

Until now, it was considered that no comprehensive right to the data existed, as it does not constitute physical objects protected by property law under the German Civil Code (BGB). This has changed with the introduction of the EU Data Act. Since its entry into force, users have been entitled to access data in the generation of which they were involved. Once users have actively claimed this right, the data must be provided in a machine-readable format. However, the obligation to provide data applies only to data in its raw form, not to processed data or algorithms.

Agricultural robots often move autonomously within specific areas of the farm, such as in farmyards, along paths between barns and feed stores, or inside the barns themselves. To prevent accidents involving uninvolved third parties – particularly children or people from outside the farm – the farmer is obliged to secure these operational areas against unauthorised access.

A typical example is a feeding robot that automatically drives over the feed table several times a day. Even if the robot is equipped with a shut-off sensor that activates when a minimum distance is not maintained, it should be ensured that, as far as possible, no unauthorised persons are present in the operating area whilst the robot is in motion. Children, visitors or external service providers in particular must be protected by appropriate measures.

This can be achieved through barriers, access restrictions, warning signs or automatic access controls. Particular caution is required in areas open to the public or near residential buildings.

A lack of or insufficient protection against unauthorised access can not only lead to accidents but also have consequences under liability and insurance law. It is therefore recommended to clearly define the robot’s operating area, mark potential danger zones and implement organisational and structural measures to protect third parties.

It must also be ensured that the company’s own employees are adequately instructed on the hazards posed by the robots. 

In order to fully and effectively harness the potential of digitalisation, a number of further developments will be required. Examples of this include the interconnection of individual devices used in the barn (interoperability) and dynamic adaptations to current, changing conditions (machine-to-machine communication, DigiMilch – networked barn technology, DigiMilch – networked, animal-specific sensor systems).

It would also be desirable for the data collected to be used, for example, by consultants or vets to support or supplement herd management and medical history.

However, the deployment and successful use of the available digital technology also requires consistent training and further education for users. The provision of such training should be further expanded and continuously adapted to new developments.