共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 375 毫秒
1.
Anne Algers Berner Lindström Edmond A. Pajor 《Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics》2011,24(4):367-379
Farm animal welfare is a knowledge domain that can be regarded as a model for new ways of organizing learning and making higher
education more responsive to the needs of society. Global concern for animal welfare has resulted in a great demand for knowledge.
As a complement to traditional education in farm animal welfare, higher education can be more demand driven and look at a
broad range of methods to make knowledge available. The result of an inventory on “farm animal welfare,” “e-learning,” “learning
resources,” and “open educational resources” in three different search engines is presented. A huge amount of information
on animal welfare is available on the Internet but many of the providers lock in the knowledge in a traditional course context.
Only a few universities develop and disseminate open learning resources within the subject. Higher education institutions
are encouraged to develop open educational resources in animal welfare for the benefit of teachers, students, society, and,
indirectly, animal welfare. 相似文献
2.
The Concept of Farm Animal Welfare: Citizen Perceptions and Stakeholder Opinion in Flanders, Belgium
Filiep Vanhonacker Wim Verbeke Els Van Poucke Zuzanna Pieniak Griet Nijs Frank Tuyttens 《Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics》2012,25(1):79-101
Several attempts to conceptualize farm animal welfare have been criticized for diverging reasons, among them often the failure
to incorporate the public concern and opinion. This paper’s objective is to develop a conception of farm animal welfare that
starts from the public’s perception and integrates the opinion of different stakeholder representatives, thus following a
fork-to-farm approach. Four qualitative citizen focus group discussions were used to develop a quantitative questionnaire,
which has been completed by a representative sample of Flemish citizens (n = 459). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were applied to develop a conception of farm animal welfare starting
from an extended list of aspects that relate to animal production and associate with farm animal welfare in the public’s perception.
In depth interviews with stakeholder representatives were used to match and adapt the structure of the animal welfare conception
model. The resulting conception revealed seven dimensions grouped in two different levels. Three dimensions were animal-based:
“Suffering and Stress,” “Ability to Engage in Natural Behavior,” and “Animal Health.” Four dimensions were resource-based:
“Housing and Barn climate,” “Transport and Slaughter,” “Feed and Water,” and “Human-Animal Relationship.” This conception
is distinct from earlier attempts since it is based on public perceptions; it addresses the opinion of different stakeholders,
and it distinguishes empirically between animal-based and resource-based dimensions in the conceptualization of farm animal
welfare. The relevancy of a popular definition is supported by the present demand oriented economy, in which animal welfare
is a non-trade concern, and mainly left to the market where consumers still mainly act as individuals who calculate and weigh
pros and cons. 相似文献
3.
Karel De Greef Frans Stafleu Carolien De Lauwere 《Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics》2006,19(1):57-66
Public debate on acceptable farm animal husbandry suffers from a confusion of tongues. To clarify positions of various stakeholder
groups in their joint search for acceptable solutions, the concept of animal welfare was split up into three notions: no suffering,
respect for intrinsic value, and non-appalling appearance of animals. This strategy was based on the hypothesis that multi-stakeholder
solutions should be based on shared values rather than on compromises. The usefulness of such an artificial value distinction
strategy was tested in a small series of experiments. The results demonstrate that the chosen concept to distinguish between
values is effective in a stakeholder context. Farmers’ views on doing good to animals appeared to be largely based on their
value to prevent suffering and predominantly focused on the provision of regular care. Their priority for this value is clearly
shared with other stakeholders, providing a basis for joint solutions. The concept of intrinsic value does not play a discernable
role in farmers’ considerations. Based on the varying views on welfare, it can be inferred that there is a gradual rather
than a principal difference between government legislation and farmers’ values, whereas public perception and acceptance of
farm practices remains complicated. Distinction between value groups and focusing on a selected notion (such as no suffering)
proved to be effective in bringing representatives of stakeholder groups together, but is unlikely to bridge the emotional
gap between commercial farm practices and public ideals. 相似文献
4.
Continued concern for animal welfare may be alleviated when welfare would be monitored on farms. Monitoring can be characterized as an information system where various stakeholders periodically exchange relevant information. Stakeholders include producers, consumers, retailers, the government, scientists, and others. Valuating animal welfare in the animal-product market chain is regarded as a key challenge to further improve the welfare of farm animals and information on the welfare of animals must, therefore, be assessed objectively, for instance, through monitoring. Interviews with Dutch stakeholder representatives were conducted to identify their perceptions about the monitoring of animal welfare. Stakeholder perceptions were characterized in relation to the specific perspectives of each stakeholder. While producers tend to perceive welfare from a production point of view, consumers will use visual images derived from traditional farming and from the animals natural environments. Scientists perceptions of animal welfare are affected by the need to measure welfare with quantifiable parameters. Retailers and governments (policy makers) have views of welfare that are derived from their relationships with producers, consumers, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and scientists. All interviewed stakeholder representatives stated that animal welfare is important. They varied in the extent to which they weighted economic considerations relative to concern for the animals welfare. Many stakeholders emphasized the importance of communication in making a monitoring system work. Overall, the perspectives for the development of a sustainable monitoring system that substantially improves farm animal welfare were assessed as being poor in the short term. However, a reliable system could be initiated under certain conditions, such as integrated chains and with influential and motivated stakeholders. A scheme is described with attention points for the development of sustainable monitoring systems for farm animal welfare in the long term. 相似文献
5.
Jeffrey M. Spooner Catherine A. Schuppli David Fraser 《Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics》2014,27(4):569-589
As part of a larger study eliciting Canadian producer and non-producer views about animal welfare, open-ended, semi-structured interviews were used to explore opinions about animal welfare of 20 Canadian pig producers, most of whom were involved in confinement-based systems. With the exception of the one organic producer, who emphasized the importance of a “natural” life, participants attached overriding importance to biological health and functioning. They saw their efforts as providing pigs with dry, thermally regulated, indoor environments where animals received abundant feed, careful monitoring and where prospective disease outbreaks could be minimized and controlled. Emphasis was also placed on low-stress handling and agreeable working conditions which were believed to promote good animal care. The fact that pigs tend to respond to such conditions with steady growth reinforced the belief that good welfare was provided. Participants supported the use of sow gestation stalls, but with some reservations, and expressed concern about welfare problems that could occur if sows were grouped. Invasive procedures (castration, tail-docking, teeth clipping) were recognized as painful but were accepted because they were seen as: (1) necessary for sales or management; (2) satisfactory trade-offs to prevent worse welfare problems such as injury or infection; or (3) sufficiently short-term to be relatively unimportant. Participants were adamantly opposed to animal neglect and some welcomed actions of animal protectionists that expose poor care. Producers also welcomed natural-science-based approaches to improving animal welfare. The findings contribute to a broader effort to identify overlapping values among different stakeholder groups as a basis for formulating mutually agreeable, farm animal care and handling polices. 相似文献
6.
Citizens’ Views on Farm Animal Welfare and Related Information Provision: Exploratory Insights from Flanders,Belgium 总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1
Filiep Vanhonacker Els Van Poucke Frank Tuyttens Wim Verbeke 《Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics》2010,23(6):551-569
The results of two independent empirical studies with Flemish citizens were combined to address the problem of a short fall
of information provision about higher welfare products. The research objectives were (1) to improve our understanding of how
citizens conceptualize farm animal welfare, (2) to analyze the variety in the claimed personal relevance of animal welfare
in the food purchasing decision process, and (3) to find out people’s needs in relation to product information about animal
welfare and the extent to which the current information caters to these needs. The first study consisted of a survey conducted
in three consecutive years (2000–2002, n = 521) and was complemented with more recent qualitative data from four focus group discussions (2006, n = 29). Citizens’ conceptualization of farm animal welfare matched reasonably well with those in the scientific literature,
although it is clearly influenced by a lower level of practical experience and a higher weight of empathy. In general, respondents
indicated that animal welfare was an important product attribute, although it was less important than primary product attributes
such as quality, health, and safety. Moral issues, rather than a perception of higher quality, were the main influence on
preferences for higher welfare products. At present, higher standards of animal welfare are mostly guaranteed within more
general quality assurance schemes. Yet people’s decisions to not choose higher welfare products seems to be related to the
perceptual disconnection between eating animal food products and the living producing animals. Respondents generally thought
better information provision was required and the present level of provision was strongly criticized. In combination, the
findings of both studies help inform the discussion about how citizens can be informed about animal welfare and the preferred
content, source, and medium of such information. The paper also provides insights into citizens’ semantic interpretation of the concept of animal welfare (what wordings they use) and the range of relevance that animal welfare has for different groups that, in turn is useful in identifying which segments can be targeted. This can contribute to a more effective valorization of animal welfare as a product attribute. 相似文献
7.
Farm animal welfare in livestock production is a topical and important issue attracting growing interest of policy makers, consumers, stakeholders in the supply chain and others. While there is much public interest in the issue this is not reflected in the supply and market shares of animal food products that are produced under welfare standards that exceed legislative requirements. Given the obstacles to devising stricter legislative standards, higher welfare animal food products are mostly made available through market-based approaches. This paper discusses different challenges and opportunities for a range of public and consumer policies and makes recommendations on how these might be strengthened. The paper does not report primary empirical findings but assembles available knowledge on citizen and consumer attitudes and perceptions towards animal welfare from various research disciplines. We argue that in order for public and consumer policies to be (more) efficient and effective, it is important to develop a segmented and targeted strategy. This paper will thus elaborate on what information could and should be provided to whom. This implies the need for a good understanding of how people conceptualize farm animal welfare. Further, information provisioning should address the needs and expectations of those specific consumer segments most likely to be motivated to purchase higher welfare products. Based on the assembled information, opportunities and challenges for information provisioning and communication to the public and consumers are identified. The merits and limitations of different forms of information provisioning and animal welfare labelling are discussed and recommendations are set forth for future research. 相似文献
8.
Stefan Aerts Dirk Lips Stuart Spencer Eddy Decuypere Johan De Tavernier 《Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics》2006,19(1):67-76
When making an assessment of animal welfare, it is important to take environmental (housing) or animal-based parameters into
account. An alternative approach is to focus on the behavior and appearance of the animal, without making actual measurements
or quantifying this. None of these tell the whole story. In this paper, we suggest that it is possible to find common ground
between these (seemingly) diametrically opposed positions and argue that this may be the way to deal with the complexity of
animal welfare. The model will have to be acceptable for the different parties that will be affected by it and real benefits
for the animal should result from it. This will be the basis of a practical ethical approach. All this can be condensed into
a model that essentially is made up out of three basic elements: the classical welfare analysis with an existing welfare assessment
tool, an assessment of the stockholder, and an implementation of the Free Choice Profiling technique. This new framework does
not pretend to be a different or better animal welfare matrix; it is intended to integrate existing knowledge and to provide
a practical tool to improve animal welfare. It identifies whether there are welfare problems on a farm, if present whether
these problems are caused by the housing system or the stockholder, and what can be done to improve the situation. 相似文献
9.
Einar Vargas-Bello-Pérez Genaro C. Miranda-de la Lama Dayane Lemos Teixeira Daniel Enríquez-Hidalgo Tamara Tadich Joop Lensink 《Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics》2017,30(5):697-713
In recent years, animal welfare has become an important element of sustainable production that has evolved along with the transformation of animal production systems. Consumer attitudes towards farm animal welfare are changing around the world, especially at emerging markets of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Survey-based research on consumer attitudes towards farm animal welfare has increased. However, the geographical coverage of studies on consumer attitudes and perceptions about farm animal welfare has mostly been limited to Europe, and North America. Until now, Latin American consumers’ attitudes towards animal welfare have not been well studied. Despite the fact that Mexico, Chile and Brazil belong to the same region (according to international organizations), there are marked differences between these countries in terms of their economical and geographical characteristics among other factors. Those differences potentially have an impact on consumer attitudes towards animal welfare and livestock production systems in general. Given the evidence from the literature review, it seems advisable that Latin American producers and food industry who engage in animal welfare-enhancing practices should clearly label their products with information on the type of husbandry system to reach those consumers who want to make an informed choice. Therefore, there are some aspects that need to be studied and cannot be worked separately in order to promote and understand consumer attitudes towards dairy and beef systems, such as geography, economic development, and politics. 相似文献
10.
Jes Lynning Harfeld Cécile Cornou Anna Kornum Mickey Gjerris 《Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics》2016,29(3):407-423
This article discusses the notion that the invisibility of the animalness of the animal constitutes a fundamental obstacle to change within current production systems. It is discussed whether housing animals in environments that resemble natural habitats could lead to a re-animalization of the animals, a higher appreciation of their moral significance, and thereby higher standards of animal welfare. The basic claim is that experiencing the animals in their evolutionary and environmental context would make it harder to objectify animals as mere bioreactors and production systems. It is argued that the historic objectification of animals within intensive animal production can only be reversed if animals are given the chance to express themselves as they are and not as we see them through the tunnel visions of economy and quantifiable welfare assessment parameters. 相似文献
11.
After satisfying their quantitative and qualitative needs as regards nutrition, consumers in developed countries are becoming
more involved in the ethical aspects of food production, especially when it relates to animal products. Social demands for
respecting animal welfare in housing systems are increasing rapidly, as is social awareness of human responsibility towards
farm animals. Many studies have been conducted on animal welfare measurement in different production systems, but the available
information for small ruminants remains insufficient. In this study, a 75 criteria-evaluation tool has been set up on the
basis of the five freedoms concept. Animal welfare considerations have been analyzed in 25 documents, including labeling schemes,
regulations, and recommendations from different European countries. The results show many differences between regular and
organic small ruminant farming standards. Emergency measures are generally lacking. A weak representation of psychological
aspects of animal welfare, especially by the current European legislation, is highlighted. 相似文献
12.
Ethological farm programs as they exist in Switzerland are compared with environmental farm programs in respect of demand and supply. Because animal welfare is not a public good but rather a relation that causes psychological externalities, the demand for animal welfare has a different standing in economic theory than the demand for a clean environment. The supply of animal welfare by farmers, however, largely follows the patterns known from the delivery of environmental goods. Farm size, age and education, and also family size and capital intensity are influencing variables. The paper concludes that the design of ethological farm programs should be based on broad public discussions as described by deliberation theorists rather than willingness-to-pay studies. 相似文献
13.
Alexandra E. D. Wells Joanne Sneddon Julie A. Lee Dominique Blache 《Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics》2011,24(6):645-658
The study explored the motivations behind Australian wool producers’ intentions regarding mulesing; a surgical procedure that
will be voluntarily phased out after 2010, following retailer boycotts led by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
Telephone interviews were conducted with 22 West Australian wool producers and consultants to elicit their behavioral, normative
and control beliefs about mulesing and alternative methods of breech strike prevention. Results indicate that approximately
half the interviewees intend to continue mulesing, despite attitudes toward the act of mulesing being quite negative. This
indicates that attitudes alone are unlikely to be good predictors of this goal directed behavior. Most respondents believed mulesing was more effective and involved less cost, time, and effort than the currently
available alternatives to prevent breech strike. Further, they felt relatively little social pressure, as they believed few
consumers were concerned about mulesing. However, they noted that if consumer sentiment changed they would likely change their
practices. Thus, attitudes are likely to be only one of several factors influencing intentions to change farm practices to
address societal concerns about animal welfare. Further, mulesing appears to be goal-directed behavior, suggesting that other factors depicted by the Model of Goal-directed Behavior (MGB; Perugini and Bagozzi In: Br J Soc Psychol,
40: 79–98, 2001) may be worth exploring in this context. Finally, these results provide insight into how policy makers may influence farmers
to change practices in response to societal pressure for improving farm animal welfare. 相似文献
14.
Colette S. Vogeler Johanna Hornung Nils C. Bandelow 《Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning》2020,22(4):518-530
ABSTRACT Sustainable agriculture implies trade-offs with farm animal welfare. Proposals to increase agricultural productivity and ecological sustainability alike, are often linked to intensification, which may restrict animal welfare. Despite the growing importance of farm animal welfare for the alignment of agricultural and environmental policy, determinants of decision-making at the EU level remain unexplored. This article contributes to closing this research gap, broadening our understanding of why policymakers vote for the enactment of animal welfare policies. Applying the Social Identities in the Policy Process (SIPP) perspective we highlight the role of group membership for individual decision-making. By means of a quantitative analysis of voting behaviour in the European Parliament on two animal welfare policies, we show that different identities are salient. The strongest predictor is political group membership. In case of defections from the group line, the salience of national, sectoral and also demographic identities adds to the understanding of decision-making. 相似文献
15.
Albert W. Musschenga 《Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics》2002,15(2):171-186
There is an ongoing debate in animalethics on the meaning and scope of animalwelfare. In certain broader views, leading anatural life through the development of naturalcapabilities is also headed under the conceptof animal welfare. I argue that a concern forthe development of natural capabilities of ananimal such as expressed when living freelyshould be distinguished from the preservationof the naturalness of its behavior andappearance. However, it is not always clearwhere a plea for natural living changes overinto a plea for the preservation of theirnaturalness or wildness. In the first part ofthis article, I examine to what extent theconcerns for natural living meet ``theexperience requirement.' I conclude that someof these concerns go beyond welfare. In thesecond part of the article. I ask whether wehave moral reasons to respect concernsfor the naturalness of an animal's living thattranscend its welfare. I argue that the moralrelevance of such considerations can be graspedwhen we see animals as entities bearingnon-moral intrinsic values. In my view the``natural' appearance and behavior of an animalmay embody intrinsic values. Caring for ananimal's naturalness should then be understoodas caring for such intrinsic values. Intrinsicvalues provide moral reasons for action iffthey are seen as constitutive of the good lifefor humans. I conclude by reinterpreting,within the framework of a perfectionist ethicaltheory, the notion of indirect dutiesregarding animals, which go beyond andsupplement the direct duties towardsanimals. 相似文献
16.
Over the past century, animal agriculture in the United States has transformed from a system of small, family farms to a largely industrialized model—often known as ‘industrial farm animal production’ (IFAP). This model has successfully produced a large supply of cheap meat, eggs and dairy products, but at significant costs to animal welfare, the environment, the risk of zoonotic disease, the economic and social health of rural communities, and overall food abundance. Over the past 40 years, numerous critiques of IFAP have been published, for both academic and non-academic audiences, mostly focusing on our obligations to animals. Here we offer a comprehensive critique of IFAP, focusing not only on our obligations to animals, but also important environmental, social, economic, and public health concerns. Our cumulative argument proceeds in five steps: (1) we briefly review the structure and key characteristics of IFAP; (2) we review the adverse effects of IFAP; (3) we review the historical development and positive rationale for IFAP; (4) we summarize previous moral critiques of IFAP, as well as defenses of it; and (5) we offer a moral critique of IFAP based on the common morality, and in particular on a principle of nonmaleficence, which we take to be the least controversial argument. 相似文献
17.
Longevity as an Animal Welfare Issue Applied to the Case of Foot Disorders in Dairy Cattle 总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1
M. R. N. Bruijnis F. L. B. Meijboom E. N. Stassen 《Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics》2013,26(1):191-205
In current dairy farming it is possible to run a profitable farm without having to adapt the system to the needs of dairy cows. In such systems the interests of the farmer and animals often diverge. Consequently, specific animal welfare problems occur. Foot disorders in dairy cattle are an illustrative example resulting from the specific methods of housing and management in current dairy farming. Foot disorders and the resulting lameness are considered the most important welfare problem in dairy farming. However, these foot disorders not only typify welfare problems related to certain housing systems, but they also lead to the premature culling of cows. The assessment of the impact of foot disorders on the welfare of dairy cows raised the question of whether premature culling affects animal welfare since it affects the longevity of a cow. We argue that this aspect of longevity is morally relevant as an animal welfare issue. In this paper we aim to explore whether longevity is both (a) a morally relevant aspect in the discussion on killing animals and (b) a constitutive element of animal welfare. In other words, we aim to explore whether longevity is an independent moral argument in an animal welfare discussion. We claim that longevity is not merely important as an indicator of animal welfare, but is also a constitutive element of animal welfare. We argue that we need a more integrated approach to animal welfare and that an assessment that includes the aspect of time is necessary. This view involves a shift from views on animal welfare in terms of functioning or feeling well to a view on animal welfare that includes the aspect of natural living in which species-specific development is important. To show the impact of these points of view, we look at the practical implications for choices concerning the management of foot disorders in dairy cattle. 相似文献
18.
The concept of natural behavior is a key element in current Dutch policy-making on animal welfare. It emphasizes that animals
need positive experiences, in addition to minimized suffering. This paper interprets the concept of natural behavior in the
context of the scientific framework for welfare assessment. Natural behavior may be defined as behavior that animals have
a tendency to exhibit under natural conditions, because these behaviors are pleasurable and promote biological functioning.
Animal welfare is the quality of life as perceived by the animal. Animals have evolved cognitive-emotional systems (“welfare
needs”) to deal with a variable environment. Animals do not only have so-called physiological needs such as the need for food,
water, and thermal comfort. They also need to exercise certain natural behaviors such as rooting or nest-building in pigs,
and scratching or dust-bathing in poultry. All needs must be taken into account in order to assess overall welfare. The degree
of need satisfaction and frustration can be assessed from scientific information about the intensity, duration, and incidence
of (welfare) performance criteria such as measurements of behavior and/or (patho)physiology. Positive welfare value relates
to how animals are inclined to behave under natural conditions, in preference tests, and in consumer-demand studies. Negative
welfare value relates to stress, frustration, abnormal behavior, aggression, and reduced fitness. Examples are given to illustrate
how the need to perform natural behaviors can be assessed following the general principles for welfare assessment, providing
a first approximation of how different natural behaviors affect animal welfare. 相似文献
19.
Ellen-Marie Forsberg 《Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics》2011,24(4):351-366
Over the last years, Norway has revised its animal welfare legislation. As of January 1, 2010, the Animal Protection Act of
1974 was replaced by a new Animal Welfare Act. This paper describes the developments in the normative structures from the
old to the new act, as well as the main traits of the corresponding implementation and governance system. In the Animal Protection
Act, the basic animal ethics principles were to avoid suffering, treat animals well, and consider their natural needs and
instincts. In addition, a principle for balancing our duties towards animals with the needs and interests of humans was expressed
by the formulation “unnecessary suffering.” These principles (only with slightly different formulations) are retained in the new act. The novelty of the
new act is shown by its explicit intention to promote respect for animals and its recognition of animals’ intrinsic value.
Whereas intrinsic value is only given a symbolic function, the notion of respect is intended to have practical consequences.
One interpretation of respect for animals is taking the animal’s integrity—and not only welfare—into account. Another is to
see the introduction of respect as a call to animal keepers to provide animals with welfare exceeding the minimum requirements.
In several respects, the legal system now seems to leave more responsibility to the individual animal keeper—and to citizens
in general. I argue that if the authorities really do want to promote respect for animals, they must at the same time initiate
activities to achieve this. In my perspective the challenge is to provide adequate measures to achieve in practice the intended
respect for animals expressed in the new act. 相似文献
20.
Michael Greger 《Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics》2011,24(5):451-472
The US Food and Drug Administration??s final Guidance for Industry on the regulation of transgenesis in animal agriculture has paved the way for the commercialization of genetically engineered (GE) farm animals. The production-related diseases associated with extant breeding technologies are reviewed, as well as the predictable welfare consequences of continued emphasis on prolificacy at the potential expense of physical fitness. Areas in which biotechnology could be used to improve the welfare of animals while maintaining profitability are explored along with regulatory schema to improve agency integration in GE animal oversight. 相似文献