scholarly journals Animal welfare cannot adequately protect nonhuman animals: The need for a science of animal well-being

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Bekoff ◽  
Jessica Pierce
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Nonhuman Animals

Future Animal: Environmental and Animal Welfare Perspectives on the Genetic Engineering of Animals

2001 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 314-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
LYLE MUNRO
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Engineering ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The West ◽  
Social Invention ◽  
Nonhuman Animals ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Case Basis ◽  
Ordinary Citizens

Genetic engineering is a social invention as much as a biological one. Ordinary citizens interested in the well-being of life on the planet should therefore be involved in the ethical debates concerning the future of nonhuman animals. The creations of genetic engineers ought to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis by what the American philosopher R. G. Frey calls “a jury of concerned individuals.” Frey is an advocate for putting animals in perspective, which means that animals matter, but not as much as humans. He therefore supports the prevailing moral orthodoxy, which currently in the West means that animals can be eaten, dissected, hunted, and exhibited, provided that these things are done humanely and that the benefits to humans outweigh the harms to the animals. The “concerned individual,” he suggests, would have no objection to humans killing animals as long as the animals do not suffer. In the present paper, my aim is to raise some of the ethical, welfare, and social issues from an animal-protectionist perspective which ordinary citizens would need to consider if they were ever asked to vote on the benefits or otherwise of the impact of genetic engineering on animal welfare.

scholarly journals The Asymmetrical Contributions of Pleasure and Pain to Animal Welfare

2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 152-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
ADAM J. SHRIVER
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Animal Experimentation ◽  
General Finding ◽  
Single Scale ◽  
Nonhuman Animals ◽  
Different Types

Abstract:Recent results from the neurosciences demonstrate that pleasure and pain are not two symmetrical poles of a single scale of experience but in fact two different types of experiences altogether, with dramatically different contributions to well-being. These differences between pleasure and pain and the general finding that “the bad is stronger than the good” have important implications for our treatment of nonhuman animals. In particular, whereas animal experimentation that causes suffering might be justified if it leads to the prevention of more suffering, it can never by justified merely by leading to increased levels of happiness.

scholarly journals Plant-based fructans for increased animal welfare: provision processes and remaining challenges

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Zimmermann ◽  
C. Visscher ◽  
M. Kaltschmitt
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Dietary Fibre ◽  
Animal Feed ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Glycosidic Bonds ◽  
Health Promoting ◽  
Branched Structure ◽  
Stimulation Of

AbstractFructans are carbohydrates consisting of fructose monomers linked by β-2,1- and/or β-2,6-glycosidic bonds with linear or branched structure. These carbohydrates belong to the group of prebiotic dietary fibre with health-promoting potential for humans and mammals due to their indigestibility and selective stimulation of microorganisms in the gastrointestinal tract. This makes fructans interesting mainly for healthy food as well as animal feed applications. As a consequence of a growing public awareness for animal welfare, dietary fibre and thus fructans move into the focus as a fibre-rich feeding improving not only animals’ health but also their well-being. Against this background, this paper summarises the known effects of fructans focusing on pigs and highlights the state of the art in fructan production processes from plant material as well as selected current research lines. Additionally, an attempt is made to assess the potential of European fructan production for an application as animal feed. Based on this, challenges in the field of fructan production are addressed and alternative substrates for fructans are discussed and pointed out.

Contemplating the Five Domains model of animal welfare assessment: UK horse owner perceptions of equine well-being

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 259-268
Author(s):  
KA Fletcher ◽  
LJ Cameron ◽  
M Freeman
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Affective State ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Equine Welfare ◽  
Species Specific ◽  
Sentient Beings ◽  
Horse Owners

Traditionally, assessment of animal welfare generally focused on physiological signs of health with less consideration of psychological well-being. More recently, the Five Domains model highlighted the concept of all aspects of an animal's life influencing their affective state. In equestrianism, however, there is a lack of awareness of the Five Domains model and, specifically, how different factors may affect the mental well-being of horses (Equus caballus). This divide between scientific research and lay horse owners could compromise equine welfare by failing to recognise horses as sentient beings with species-specific needs. The present study therefore aimed to explore how evidence-based information can be effectively communicated to equestrians (n = 259) through an online survey and whether increased knowledge of equine welfare needs has any impact on horse caregivers' assessment of their own horses' quality of life. Results showed that a simple educational infographic based on the Five Domains model had a significant impact on equestrians' assessment of equine welfare, although longitudinal, empirical studies are needed. Scores on a Likert scale for health, behaviour/human interactions and overall welfare were significantly lower following the intervention but scores for emotional well-being were significantly higher. This may suggest that, whilst the infographic increased participant awareness of the importance of emotional state and the factors affecting welfare, there were difficulties or inconsistencies in objectively assessing these emotions. This highlights the need for equine welfare science to be communicated more proactively to horse owners in an accessible, engaging format.

Perambulating Mice and the Confluence of Sympathy and Moral Education

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-40
Author(s):  
Shawna Lichtenwalner
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Moral Education ◽  
Animal Rights ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Mary Wollstonecraft ◽  
Late Eighteenth Century ◽  
Anna Letitia Barbauld ◽  
Nonhuman Animals ◽  
Late Eighteenth

The late eighteenth century was the locus of a burgeoning interest in animal rights. This essay examines the critical role that children’s literature had in the evolution of more consideration for animal welfare. The use of animals in the works of writers such as Sarah Trimmer, Mary Wollstonecraft, Anna Letitia Barbauld, and Dorothy Kilner helped create a form of animal subjectivity as a means of teaching children compassion through the creation of sympathy for nonhuman animals. By fostering compassion for the needs of so-called “dumb creatures” children could also be taught, by extension, to have more consideration for other people. In particular, Dorothy Kilner’s animal autobiography The Life and Perambulations of a Mouse offers a new way of viewing animals who are neither physical nor affectional slaves as worthy of both consideration and compassion.

scholarly journals 428 Values and perception: communicating controversial issues in animal agriculture

2019 ◽  
Vol 97 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. 69-70
Author(s):  
Jessica Eise
Keyword(s):  
Food Security ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Extensive Literature ◽  
Directional Bias ◽  
Animal Agriculture ◽  
Global Food Security ◽  
Public Debates

Abstract Animal agriculture is an important component of global food security, with animal products serving as a foundational component of many American diets as well as playing a crucial role the sustainability of food production and environmental well-being. Yet animal welfare is one of the most contentious issues in the United States, producing heated, polarizing public debates. Meanwhile, national trends across all major issues demonstrate an increasing loss of common ground between political parties, with no indication of an imminent turnaround. The contentious nature of animal welfare and animal science public debates, as well as indications of increasing polarization across the nation, presents a worrisome dilemma in the face of a growing need to make meaningful societal progress around food security. Research has long demonstrated that contentious arguments, disdainful debates or reiteration of facts often backfire and cause people to double down on their beliefs, with extensive literature in psychology showing that humans are goal-directed information processors who tend to evaluate information with a directional bias toward reinforcing pre-existing views. In this article, I demonstrate how research on the role of values in risk perception can provide a helpful frame for building understanding between competing groups around contentious animal agriculture issues, inform more effective communication efforts and build potential for progress-oriented collaboration.

Political conservatism and the exploitation of nonhuman animals: An application of system justification theory

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 858-878 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark R. Hoffarth ◽  
Flávio Azevedo ◽  
John T. Jost
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Economic System ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Animal Suffering ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
System Justification Theory ◽  
Nonhuman Animals ◽  
Political Conservatism ◽  
Welfare Attitudes

Many people in Western societies tolerate the mistreatment of nonhuman animals, despite obvious ethical concerns about the injustice of animal suffering and exploitation. In three studies, we applied system justification theory to examine the ideological basis of human–animal relations. In Studies 1a and 1b, we showed in both a large convenience sample ( N = 2,119) and a nationally representative sample in the US ( N = 1,500) that economic system justification uniquely explained the relationship between political conservatism and animal welfare attitudes even after adjusting for social dominance orientation. In Study 2, we replicated and extended these findings using more elaborate measures of animal welfare attitudes in the context of an MTurk sample of U.S. respondents ( N = 395). Specifically, we found that conservatism was associated with less support for animal welfare and greater endorsement of speciesism (the belief that humans are morally superior to nonhuman animals) and that individual differences in economic system justification mediated these associations. We discuss several ways in which system justification theory may inform interventions designed to promote support for animal welfare in society at large.

Gene Doping—in Animals? Ethical Issues at the Intersection of Animal Use, Gene Editing, and Sports Ethics

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
CAROLYN P. NEUHAUS ◽  
BRENDAN PARENT
Keyword(s):  
Moral Status ◽  
Gene Editing ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The State ◽  
Sports Ethics ◽  
Nonhuman Animals ◽  
Animal Use ◽  
Moral Status Of Animals ◽  
Do So

Abstract:Gene editors such as CRISPR could be used to create stronger, faster, or more resilient nonhuman animals. This is of keen interest to people who breed, train, race, and profit off the millions of animals used in sport that contribute billions of dollars to legal and illegal economies across the globe. People have tried for millennia to perfect sport animals; CRISPR proposes to do in one generation what might have taken decades previously. Moreover, gene editing may facilitate enhancing animals’ capacities beyond their typical limits. This paper describes the state of animal use and engineering for sport, examines the moral status of animals, and analyzes current and future ethical issues at the intersection of animal use, gene editing, and sports. We argue that animal sport enthusiasts and animal welfarists alike should be concerned about the inevitable use of CRISPR in sport animals. Though in principle CRISPR could be used to improve sport animals’ well-being, we think it is unlikely in practice to do so.

scholarly journals Nonhuman Animal Experiments in the European Community: Human Values and Rational Choice

2010 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kay Peggs
Keyword(s):  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Rational Choice ◽  
European Community ◽  
Animal Experiments ◽  
Nonhuman Animal ◽  
Moral Issues ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Nonhuman Animals ◽  
The Impact

AbstractIn 2008, the European Community (EC) adopted a Proposal to revise the EC Directive on nonhuman animal experiments, with the aim of improving the welfare of the nonhuman animals used in experiments. An Impact Assessment, which gauges the likely economic and scientific effects of future changes, as well as the effects on nonhuman animal welfare, informs the Proposal. By using a discourse analytical approach, this paper examines the Directive, the Impact Assessment and the Proposal to reflect critically upon assumptions about the morality of nonhuman animal experiments. Because nonhuman animal welfare is so prominent in the Proposal, it appears that the EC position advances beyond human self-interest (orthodox rational choice) as the sole motivator for such experiments, to ethical questions about the welfare of nonhuman animals (which can be better explained by a multidimensional approach to rational choice). In examining this contention, this paper concludes that, even given concerns about nonhuman animal welfare, nonhuman animal experimentation in the EC is firmly grounded in a morality that focuses on human benefit goals rather than on the wider moral issues associated with the means of achieving such goals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document