可持续消费、人类福利与环境影响：进展与问题

可持续消费是实现全球可持续发展目标的关键内容之一。如何在增加人类福利的同时,通过践行可持续消费模式以实现生态环境持续健康发展,是我们迫切需要总结和讨论的重要议题。在系统梳理可持续消费概念、必备条件以及可持续消费效果评估的基础上,综述了消费与人类福利的关系以及水足迹视角下消费的环境影响评估研究,通过阐释人类福利、环境影响以及可持续消费模式之间的内在联系,指明当前研究工作中存在的主要问题有：（1）在可持续发展模式实践中,缺少系统、科学、合理、针对性强、有效的“战略指导”和“战略引导”;（2）缺少对可持续消费状态的系统评估和评判标准;（3）虽明确了可持续消费模式优化的方向,但个人实践可持续消费的潜在行为能力仍有待评估;（4）宏观层面的可持续消费机制或约束机制较为缺乏、可持续消费实践研究相对缺位;（5）可持续消费模式与可持续生计关联机制研究较为缺乏。最终反思提出未来应该在以下几个方面深入研究：（1）明确可持续消费的战略定位,完善顶层设计;（2）深化对可持续消费的系统评估,构建科学合理的可持续消费评估指标体系;（3）加强个人实践在可持续消费中潜在行为能力的测度;（4）深入研究宏观层面的可持续消费机制,以推动可持续消费的实践发展;（5）深入研究可持续消费模式与可持续生计关联机制,达成脱贫与长期福利的双赢红利。     

Assessing the Importance of Natural Behavior for Animal Welfare

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.     

The ethics and politics of the caged layer hen debate in New Zealand

Changes in attitudes toward animal welfare, with a greater emphasis on the importance of allowing animals to express normal patterns of behavior has led to an examination of the practice of keeping hens in battery cages. There is widespread scientific consensus that the conditions of confinement and the barren nature of battery cages severely restrict hens’ behavioral repertoire, and are thus detrimental to their welfare. The New Zealand Animal Welfare Act 1999, stipulates that animals must have “the opportunity to display normal patterns of behaviour.” In spite of this provision, the New Zealand government has not acted in phasing out battery cages, arguing instead that there is insufficient evidence that welfare will be improved by a phase-out. There is evidence of strong industry pressure on the government, and the use of tactics common in policy considerations where changes are resisted by powerful interests. It is important that policy processes are better managed so that welfare changes are based on both public preferences and scientific knowledge, and ways of doing this are discussed.     

A New Framework for the Assessment of Animal Welfare: Integrating Existing Knowledge from a Practical Ethics Perspective

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.     

Qualitative Stakeholder Analysis for the Development of Sustainable Monitoring Systems for Farm Animal Welfare

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.     

The Idea of “Ethical Accounting” for a Livestock Farm

This paper presents the idea of a decision-support system for a livestock farm, called “ethical accounting”, to be used as an extension of traditional cost accounting. “Ethical accounting” seeks to make available to the farmer information about how his decisions affect the interests of farm animals, consumers and future generations. Furthermore, “ethical accounting” involves value-based planning. Thus, the farmer should base his choice of production plan on reflections as to his fundamental objectives, and he should make his final decision only after having seriously considered the various consequences for the affected parties. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Economic effects of CO2 fertilization of crops: transforming changes in yield into changes in supply

Increasing concentrations of atmospheric carbon dioxide CO₂ have a beneficial effect on crop production that would tend to offset some of the economic losses that might be generated in some areas by the climatic effects of atmospheric CO₂ and other greenhouse gases. Previous estimates of the economic benefits of CO₂ fertilization on world crop production, however, were based on the assumption that percent changes in supply are equal to percent changes in yield. This assumption is not valid, however, because it confounds changes in supply with changes in quantity supplied. This error leads to an overestimation of the real economic benefits of CO₂ fertilization by 61–166%. The effects of CO₂ fertilization on crop production, therefore, will reduce some of the potential damages caused by the climatic impacts of greenhouse gases, but by significantly less than that indicated in earlier research.     

Is animal welfare a central issue for consumers of luxury goods?

The compatibility between luxury and sustainable development has been increasingly examined in recent literature, but a number of ethical issues remain unexplored. One such concern is animal welfare, a recurrent question in the luxury goods sector. This is one of the first research articles to shed light on this subject, utilising two studies, one qualitative and the other quantitative with conjoint analysis, conducted among 12 and 253 French consumers, respectively. The results reveal that consumers are sensitive to the challenge of animal welfare in luxury, but fall into two different groups. Some have a preference for animal‐based raw materials sourced from livestock farms that respect animal welfare, whilst others are more favourable to the use of synthetic raw materials. In particular, the results show that the use of synthetic raw materials is accepted by some consumers but can lead to a reduction in the perceived value of luxury products.     

Not All Animals are Equal Differences In Moral Foundations For The Dutch Veterinary Policy On Livestock and Animals In Nature Reservations

The Netherlands is a small country with many people and much livestock. As a result, animals in nature reservations are often living near cattle farms. Therefore, people from the agricultural practices are afraid that wild animals will infect domestic livestock with diseases like Swine Fever and Foot and Mouth Disease. To protect agriculture (considered as an important economic practice), very strict regulations have been made for minimizing this risk. In this way, the practice of animal farming has been dominating the practices of nature management completely. If, for instance, Foot and Mouth Disease strikes an agricultural area, all wild pigs and cattle living in the nearby nature reservations have to be killed, whether infected or not. This dominant position of one practice over the other has now become problematic. While the morality of the practice of nature management seems to be very different from the morality of agriculture and agriculture has become less important from an economic point of view, the public as well as those involved in nature management no longer seem to accept the dominant position of agriculture. Besides a literature study, we performed a field study with in-depth interviews with experts from both practices to analyze the dynamics of the internal moralities of both practices in the previous century, in order to clarify the contemporary situation. The conclusion was that the traditionally strong position of agriculture is not only weakening; it also appears that the internal values of agriculture are changing. The experts from both sides agreed that, in case of a disease outbreak, it is neither ethically justified nor necessary (because of the estimated low risk of disease transfer) to destroy the animals in nature reservations as a routine preventive measure. This is a major shift in morality.