Bovine Tuberculosis and Badger Culling in England: An Animal Rights-Based Analysis of Policy Options

Bovine tuberculosis (bovine TB) is an important and controversial animal health policy issue in England, which impacts humans, cattle and badgers. The government policy of badger culling has led to widespread opposition, in part due to the conclusions of a large field trial recommending against culling, and in part because badgers are a cherished wildlife species. Animal rights (AR) theorists argue that sentient nonhumans should be accorded fundamental rights against killing and suffering. In bovine TB policy, however, pro-culling actors claim that badgers must be culled to avoid the slaughter of cattle. The first part of the paper compares AR theories of Regan, Francione, Cochrane, Garner and Donaldson and Kymlicka in the context of wildlife species. The second part of the paper applies these AR theories to bovine TB and badger control. AR theories are applied to badger control policy options of (1) do nothing, (2) badger culling, and (3) badger vaccination. We conclude that AR theories are strongly opposed to badger culling. In general, culling is prohibited due to a badger’s right to life and its rights against suffering. The AR theories support a do-nothing, i.e. non-culling, non-vaccination approach to badger control. In the case of the AR theories of Regan and Francione, this is based on abolitionist positions with respect to farming. For Cochrane, Garner, and Donaldson and Kymlicka, the do-nothing policy option is preferred because badger vaccination causes a degree of suffering which generally is not for the individual’s benefit.     

Bovine Tuberculosis Policy in England: Would a Virtuous Government Cull Mr Badger?

Bovine tuberculosis (bovine TB) is the most important animal health and welfare policy issue in Britain. Badgers are a wildlife reservoir of disease, although the eight-year Independent Scientific Group (ISG) Randomised Badger Culling Trial concluded with a recommendation against culling. The report advised government that bovine TB could be controlled, and ultimately eradicated, by cattle-based measures alone. Despite the ISG recommendation against culling, the farming and veterinary industries continued to lobby government for a badger cull. The 2005–2010 Labour government followed the ISG advice and decided against a cull. The 2010–2015 Coalition and the 2015-present Conservative governments have followed a badger culling policy. This paper investigates whether a virtuous government would cull badgers. It provides an overview of virtue theory in the context of government animal health and welfare policy. Bovine TB and badger control policy options are then analysed in the context of the virtues of justice, wisdom, integrity, loyalty, curiosity, trust, empathy, compassion and aesthetics. Justice is the first virtue of government, and badger culling is seriously problematic from a virtue perspective given that five badgers are culled per cow that avoids slaughter as a result. Analysis based on other virtues strongly suggests that government should not cull badgers. The paper concludes that a virtuous government would not cull badgers as part of policy to control bovine TB in cattle.     

Bovine Tuberculosis and Badger Control in Britain: Science,Policy and Politics

Bovine tuberculosis (bovine TB) is the most economically important animal health policy issue in Britain. The problem of what to do about badgers has plagued successive governments since a dead badger was discovered with bovine TB in 1971. Successive Labour governments (1997–2010) oversaw the Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT) from 1998 to 2006. Despite the RBCT recommendation against culling, the 2010–2015 Coalition government implemented pilot badger culls. This paper provides an account of the evolution of bovine TB and badger control policy, focusing on the 1997–2010 Labour, the 2010–2015 Coalition and the 2015-present Conservative governments. Interviews with bovine TB policy stakeholders supplement discussion of the development of bovine TB policy. The paper discusses the science and politics of bovine TB policy, in which there are different badger control policies in Westminster, Welsh and Scottish governments. Badger control is a highly polarised issue, and the Coalition and Conservative governments have been heavily criticised for a culling policy opposed by the independent scientific community. Recent governments have defended badger culling on the basis of veterinary advice and experience in countries such as New Zealand. The paper concludes with two key recommendations to inform controversial animal health and welfare policy issues such as bovine TB. First, mandatory Animal Welfare Impact Assessment provides objective data on the impacts of policy options on cows and badgers. Second, robust ethical analysis, conducted by independent experts using established moral frameworks, should be applied to animal health and welfare issues for the benefit of decision makers.     

Bovine TB,Badger Culling and Applied Ethics: Utilitarianism,Animal Welfare and Rights

Applying competing ethical theories to the issue of bovine TB and badger culling can throw light on the validity of the policy options. Utilitarianism is, superficially at least, an attractive option. However, the aggregative principle is problematic and this is well illustrated in the case of bovine TB and badger culling. Such is the variety and strength of interests to be considered that it is not at all clear which course of action will maximise utility. In addition, it may be that the full range of consequences can never be known with any degree of accuracy. An alternative option is to revert to an animal welfare ethic. This has the effect of cutting down the moral complexities involved in a discussion of bovine TB and badger culling, since, providing it is done humanely, killing badgers is not an ethical issue, and even the infliction of suffering on them is permissible providing it serves a significant human benefit. The animal welfare ethic, however, is normatively inadequate because it exaggerates the ethical importance of personhood. Because of this, it allows us to justify killing badgers, and might even justify the infliction of considerable suffering if by so doing there is a good chance that economic benefits will accrue. As a result, a deontological position, where animals are accorded the protection of rights, seems a much more promising alternative to utilitarianism. The adoption of any variety of animal rights would render badger culling morally illegitimate.     

Public values for badgers,bovine TB reduction and management strategies

This paper applies an attribute-based stated choice experiment approach to estimate the value that society places on changes to the size of the badger population in England and Wales. The study was undertaken in the context of a rising incidence of bovine tuberculosis (bTB) in cattle and the government's review of current bTB control policy. This review includes consideration of culling badgers to reduce bTB in cattle, since badgers are thought to be an important wildlife reservoir for the disease. The design of the CE involved four attributes (size of badger population, cattle slaughtered due to bTB, badger management strategy and household tax) at four levels with eight choice sets of two alternatives presented to respondents. Telephone interviews were undertaken with over 400 respondents, which elicited their attitudes and preferences concerning badgers, bTB in cattle and badger management strategies. The study estimated a willingness to pay of £0.10 per household per year per 100,000 badgers and £1.52 per household per year per 10,000 cattle slaughtered due to bTB which aggregated to £22 per badger and £3298 per bTB slaughtered animal for all households in England and Wales. Management strategy toward badgers had a very high valuation, highlighting the emotive issue of badger culling for respondents and the importance of government policy towards badgers.     

Policy formulation for the management of hazardous pollutants

Hazardous pollutants pose a number of distinct problems for the public policy maker, most notably because of the uncertainty surrounding the effects of such pollutants and the potentially serious or irreversible outcomes of hazardous pollution damage. Policy approaches to the problem have generally used some kind of balancing approach—between costs and benefits, or between risks and benefits. Direct controls such as standards or bans are the most commonly used policy instruments in dealing with hazardous pollutants due to the certainty of outcome which they provide. However, many more regulatory options are available to the public policy maker, for example, economic incentives and legal procedures.     

Camel culling and carbon emissions in rangelands in central Australia

Culling feral camels will impact on the carbon emissions from them. Culling of feral camels stops their long-term continuous methane emission, but emits carbon from their carcasses in the short term. Through on-site monitoring of the decomposition process of camels that have been shot dead, this paper models the pattern of carbon emissions during the decomposition of these camels in Central Australia, and analyses the contribution of the camel culling programme to carbon emission mitigation on the rangelands. A ‘carbon royalty’ payment mechanism is also suggested to encourage local participation in carbon markets through an involvement in natural resource management.     

The Precautionary Principle: Scientific Uncertainty and Omitted Research in the Context of GMO Use and Release

Commercialization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have sparked profound controversies concerning adequate approaches to risk regulation. Scientific uncertainty and ambiguity, omitted research areas, and lack of basic knowledge crucial to risk assessmentshave become apparent. The objective of this article is to discuss the policy and practical implementation of the Precautionary Principle. A major conclusion is that the void in scientific understanding concerning risks posed by secondary effects and the complexity ofcause-effect relations warrant further research. Initiatives to approach the acceptance or rejection of a number of risk-associated hypotheses is badly needed. Further, since scientific advice plays a key role in GMOregulations, scientists have a responsibility to address and communicate uncertainty to policy makers and the public. Hence, the acceptance of uncertainty is not only a scientific issue, but is related to public policy and involves an ethical dimension.     

Risk of public disclosure in environmental farm plan programs: Characteristics and mitigating legal and policy strategies

Although various studies have shown that farmers believe there is the need for a producer-led initiative to address the environmental problems from agriculture, farmers in several Canadian provinces have been reluctant to widely participate in Environmental Farm Plan (EFP) programs. Few studies have examined the key issues associated with adopting EFP programs based on farmers’, as opposed to policy makers’, perspectives on why producers are reluctant to participate in the program. A study adapting Van Raaij’s (1981) conceptual model of the decision-making environment of the firm, and prospect theory on value functions associated with the gains and losses from risky choices can be used to characterize how farmers perceive potential risks in environmental farm planning. This framework can be used to assert that farmers are concerned about risks of public disclosure of potentially incriminating environmental information from farms because the EFP program requirements for identification and extensive documentation of farm information is perceived by farmers as facilitating the accessibility of environmental information to the public, and public investigative efforts. Although the EFP program does not explicitly generate information about the environmental conditions of a farm nor the disclosure of such information to the public, it creates the possibility of generating and divulging potentially incriminating information that the farmer may want to treat as confidential. Yet, alone, these risks of public disclosure concerns should not prevent farmers from participating in the EFP. Awareness of and participation in environmental farm planning can be increased if farmers and policy makers understand what the risks are, and how they arise. Aspects of the EFP process that have the potential to generate risk of public disclosure concerns relate to farm reviews, documentation and record keeping, and corrective action plans. There are legal and policy instruments that can offer various forms of protection and help minimize such risks, and these need to be assessed.     

Risk of Public Disclosure in Environmental Farm Plan Programs: Characteristics and Mitigating Legal and Policy Strategies

Although various studies have shown thatfarmers believe there is the need for a producer-ledinitiative to address the environmental problems fromagriculture, farmers in several Canadian provinceshave been reluctant to widely participate inEnvironmental Farm Plan (EFP) programs. Few studieshave examined the key issues associated with adoptingEFP programs based on farmers', as opposed to policymakers', perspectives on why producers are reluctantto participate in the program. A study adapting VanRaaij's (1981) conceptual model of the decision-makingenvironment of the firm, and prospect theory on valuefunctions associated with the gains and losses fromrisky choices can be used to characterize how farmersperceive potential risks in environmental farmplanning. This framework can be used to assert thatfarmers are concerned about risks of public disclosureof potentially incriminating environmental informationfrom farms because the EFP program requirements foridentification and extensive documentation of farminformation is perceived by farmers as facilitatingthe accessibility of environmental information to thepublic, and public investigative efforts. Although theEFP program does not explicitly generate informationabout the environmental conditions of a farm nor thedisclosure of such information to the public, itcreates the possibility of generating and divulgingpotentially incriminating information that the farmermay want to treat as confidential. Yet, alone, theserisks of public disclosure concerns should not preventfarmers from participating in the EFP. Awareness ofand participation in environmental farm planning canbe increased if farmers and policy makers understandwhat the risks are, and how they arise. Aspects of theEFP process that have the potential to generate riskof public disclosure concerns relate to farm reviews,documentation and record keeping, and correctiveaction plans. There are legal and policy instrumentsthat can offer various forms of protection and helpminimize such risks, and these need to be assessed.     

Application of the analytic hierarchy process to compare alternatives for the long-term management of surplus mercury

This paper describes a systematic method for comparing options for the long-term management of surplus elemental mercury in the US, using the analytic hierarchy process as embodied in commercially available Expert Choice software. A limited scope multi-criteria decision analysis was performed. Two (2) general types of treatment technologies were evaluated (stabilization/amalgamation and selenide), combined with four (4) disposal options: (a) hazardous waste landfill; (b) hazardous waste monofill; (c) engineered below-ground structure; and (d) mined cavity. In addition, three storage options for elemental mercury were considered: (a) aboveground structure; (b) hardened structure; and (c) mined cavity. Alternatives were evaluated against criteria that included costs, environmental performance, compliance with current regulations, implementation considerations, technology maturity, potential risks to the public and workers, and public perception. Considering non-cost criteria only, the three storage options rank most favorably. If both cost and other criteria are considered, then landfill options are preferred, because they are the least expensive ones. Storage options ranked unfavorably on cost because: (a) even relatively small per annum costs will add up over time; and (b) storage is a temporary solution and, sooner or later, a treatment and disposal technology will be adopted, which adds to the cost. However, the analysis supports continued storage for a short period (up to a few decades) followed by permanent retirement when treatment technologies have matured. Suggestions for future work include: (a) involving additional stakeholders in the process, (b) evaluating alternatives for mercury-containing wastes rather than for elemental mercury only, (c) revisiting the analysis periodically to determine if changes are required, (d) conducting uncertainty analyses utilizing Monte Carlo-based techniques.     

Regulating overabundant ungulate populations: an example for elk in Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado

In many areas of the world, populations of native ungulates have become so abundant that they are believed to be harming vegetation and disrupting ecosystem function. Methods for controlling overabundance populations include culling animals from the population and controlling fertility using contraceptives. However, understanding the feasibility these alternatives requires insight into their long-term effects on populations. We constructed a simulation model to evaluate options for regulating elk populations in and around Rocky Mountain National Park and used the model to compare different treatment options. Methods were evaulated with respect to the time required to reduce the population to a target level, the number of animals treated and/or culled and the risk of extinction. We contrasted culling with lifetime-effect contraceptives and yearlong contraceptives. Lifetime contraceptives required treating the fewest animals to maintain the population at desired targets. However, this approach also causes the greatest population variability and potential risk of extinction. Yearlong contraceptives required treatment of dramatically more animals but had essentially no extinction risk whereas culling produced intermediate levels of both extinction risk and number of animals treated. These results characterize the risks and benefits of alternative control strategies for overabundant wildlife. They emerge from a modeling approach that can be broadly useful in helping managers in choose between alternatives for regulating overabundant wildlife.     

Access rights for outdoor recreation in New Zealand: some lessons for open country in England and Wales

Access opportunities for outdoor recreation in New Zealand and England and Wales are classified according to their conformity with collective, citizenship or exclusion rights and their degrees of permanence. Alternative criteria for the apportionment of access rights are considered in the context of this classification. Different criteria for rights apportionment are found to be appropriate according to different circumstances in the context of pluralist provision. Policy developments in New Zealand are compared with those in England. After 150 years of a dominance of collective rights in New Zealand current policy is shifting provision towards exclusionary rights. In England, there is a policy shift in the other direction, towards collective rights. Lessons for the development of collective rights in England are drawn from the New Zealand experience in relation to styles of governance, public preferences, public cost, insurance liability and the potential of markets.     

Managing water through change and uncertainty: comparing lessons from the adaptive co-management literature to recent policy developments in England

Water management is set to become increasingly variable and unpredictable, in particular because of climate change. This paper investigates the extent to which water policy in England provides an enabling environment for ‘adaptive co-management’, which its proponents claim can achieve the dual objective of ecosystem protection and livelihood sustainability under conditions of change and uncertainty. Five policy categories are derived from a literature review, and are used to conduct a directed content analysis of seven key water policy documents. The findings reveal that although, in part, English water policy serves as an enabling environment for adaptive co-management, there is a level of discrepancy between substantive aspects of the five policy categories and water policy in England. Addressing these discrepancies will be important if English water policy is to allow for the emergence of processes, like adaptive co-management, that are capable of coping with the challenges that lie ahead.     

The use of indicators in environmental policy appraisal: lessons from the design and evolution of water security policy measures

Drawing up environmental policy options is a complex activity which involves defining and weighing the merits and risks of various alternative courses of action governments could pursue. In its modern version, this task typically involves formal policy analysis or ‘policy appraisal’, that is, policy work specifically undertaken to generate and evaluate policy options in order to address problems or issues on a policy agenda. Indicators play a powerful but under-investigated role in this process. To shed light on this issue, the paper conducts a case study of the design and evolution of policy indicators in water security policy formulation, examining both their utilization and impact. The paper documents the origins of water security policy indicators; assesses their relevance and influence in policy formulation and identifies the reasons for the emergence of certain preferred indices, despite their having several well-known limitations. In particular, the discussion flags the significance of the political advantages surrounding their ease of use and interpretation, rather than their technical merits, as a key factor affecting the continued utilization and influence of specific indicators in environmental policy and planning.     

Options for management of municipal solid waste in New York City: a preliminary comparison of health risks and policy implications

Landfill disposal and waste-to-energy (WTE) incineration remain the two principal options for managing municipal solid waste (MSW). One critical determinant of the acceptability of these options is the different health risks associated with each. In this analysis relying on published data and exposure modeling, we have performed health risk assessments for landfill disposal versus WTE treatment options for the management of New York City's MSW. These are based on the realistic scenario of using a waste transfer station (WTS) in Brooklyn and then transporting the untreated MSW by truck to a landfill in Pennsylvania or using a WTE facility in Brooklyn and then transporting the resultant ash by truck to a landfill in Pennsylvania. The overall results indicate that the individual cancer risks for both options would be considered generally acceptable, although the risk from landfilling is approximately 5 times greater than from WTE treatment; the individual non-cancer health risks for both options would be considered generally unacceptable, although once again the risk from landfilling is approximately 5 times greater than from WTE treatment. If one considers only the population in Brooklyn that would be directly affected by the siting of either a WTS or a WTE facility in their immediate neighborhood, individual cancer and non-cancer health risks for both options would be considered generally acceptable, but risks for the former remain considerably higher than for the latter. These results should be considered preliminary due to several limitations of this study such as: consideration of risks only from inhalation exposures; assumption that only volume and not composition of the waste stream is altered by WTE treatment; reliance on data from the literature rather than actual measurements of the sites considered, assuming comparability of the sites. However, the results of studies such as this, in conjunction with ecological, socioeconomic and equity considerations, should prove useful to environmental managers, regulators, policy makers, community representatives and other stakeholders in making sound and acceptable decisions regarding the optimal handling of MSW.     

Public attitudes to nuclear energy: Salience and anxiety

During the last decade there has been a significant increase in public concern about nuclear energy. This paper presents a brief overview of trends and developments in public opinion since the late 1970s. One possible reason for this increased concern is the public's perception of risks. Research has shown a considerable divergence in public and expert assessment of the risks associated with nuclear energy. It will be argued that qualitative aspects of these risks play a crucial role in the public's perception of nuclear energy, and that reactions such as fear and anxiety are the major determinants of attitudes to the building of new nuclear power stations in one's neighbourhood. It is also clear, however, that differences in the perception of these risks do not embrace all the relevant aspects of public acceptance of nuclear energy. Public reaction is also related to more general values and beliefs, and the issue of nuclear energy is firmly embedded in a much wider moral and political domain.     

Scenario-based stakeholder engagement: incorporating stakeholders preferences into coastal planning for climate change

Climate change poses many challenges for ecosystem and resource management. In particular, coastal planners are struggling to find ways to prepare for the potential impacts of future climate change while dealing with immediate pressures. Decisions on how to respond to future risks are complicated by the long time horizons and the uncertainty associated with the distribution of impacts. Existing coastal zone management approaches in the UK either do not adequately incorporate changing stakeholder preferences, or effectively ensure that stakeholders are aware of the trade-offs inherent in any coastal management decision. Using a novel method, scenario-based stakeholder engagement, which brings together stakeholder analysis, climate change management scenarios and deliberative techniques, the necessary trade-offs associated with long term coastal planning are explored. The method is applied to two case studies of coastal planning in Christchurch Bay on the south coast of England and the Orkney Islands off the north coast of Scotland. A range of conflicting preferences exist on the ideal governance structure to manage the coast under different climate change scenarios. In addition, the results show that public understanding of the trade-offs that have to be made is critical in gaining some degree of public support for long term coastal decision-making. We conclude that scenario-based stakeholder engagement is a useful tool to facilitate coastal management planning that takes into account the complexities and challenges of climate change, and could be used in conjunction with existing approaches such as the Shoreline Management Planning process.     

Where do we go from here? Environmental focus groups and planning policy formation

Focus groups have achieved a profile in the analysis of public values unparalleled since the emergence of national opinion polls. While they have been used in a variety of public policy, academic and political settings it is their employment within the field of environmental policy, specifically the land-use planning system, that is the focus of this paper. Using evidence from empirical research it is argued that the research-policy interface of environmental focus groups and planning is currently both undertheorised and underpractised. Undertheorised in that much of the literature on focus groups concentrates on their conduct rather than how they can inform policy. Underpractised because focus group data are failing to have much impact on policy. This paper concentrates on the second of these propositions by showing that while some of the problems with quantitative public environmental values surveys can be overcome by focus groups, the nature and content of the data they produce are not easily assimilated by existing planning structures. In an era when the role of the public, in all its diversity, is being emphasised in policy circles, and collaborative projects between academia and policy communities on environmental issues are becoming increasingly commonplace, early warning signs of tensions between research findings and policy development need to be heeded. A failure to acknowledge these problems may well lead to impoverished environmental policy in planning, a further marginalisation of publics from policy processes and an unjust devaluation of the focus-group method.