Animal Ethics and the Scientific Study of Animals

2004 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 404-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Fraser ◽  
Rod Preece ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Animal Ethics ◽  
Ancient Greece ◽  
Mental States ◽  
Cognitive Ethology ◽  
Ethical Implications ◽  
Nonhuman Animals ◽  
Animal Welfare Science ◽  
Taxonomic Groups ◽  
Empirical Material

From ancient Greece to the present, philosophers have variously emphasized either the similarities or the differences between humans and nonhuman animals as a basis for ethical conclusions. Thus animal ethics has traditionally involved both factual claims, usually about animals’ mental states and capacities, and ethical claims about their moral standing. However, even in modern animal ethics the factual claims are often scientifically uninformed, involve broad generalizations about diverse taxonomic groups, and show little agreement about how to resolve the contradictions. Research in cognitive ethology and animal welfare science provides empirical material and a set of emerging methods for testing the plausibility of claims about animal mentation and thus for clarifying the interests and needs of animals. We suggest that progress in animal ethics requires both philosophically informed science to provide an empirically grounded understanding of animals, and scientifically informed philosophy to explore the ethical implications that follow.

scholarly journals Linking animal ethics and animal welfare science

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sue Donaldson ◽  
Will Kymlicka
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Animal Ethics ◽  
Animal Welfare Science

scholarly journals Animal Welfare Science: Recent Publication Trends and Future Research Priorities

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Walker ◽  
María Díez-León ◽  
Georgia Mason
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
Laboratory Animals ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Affective States ◽  
Farmed Fish ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
The Future ◽  
Animal Welfare Science ◽  
Taxonomic Groups

Animal welfare science is a young and thriving field. Over the last two decades, the output of scientific publications on welfare has increased by c. 10-15% annually (tripling as a proportion of all science papers logged by ISI’s Web of Science), with just under half the c. 8500 total being published in the last 4 years. These papers span an incredible 500+ journals, but around three quarters have been in 80 animal science, veterinary, ethology, conservation and specialized welfare publications, and nearly 25% are published in just two: Animal Welfare and Applied Animal Behaviour Science. Farmed animals – especially mammals – have attracted by far the most research. This broadly reflects the vastness of their populations and the degree of public concern they elicit; poultry, however, are under-studied, and farmed fish ever more so: fish have only recently attracted welfare research, and are by far the least studied of all agricultural species, perhaps because of ongoing doubts about their sentience. We predict this farm animal focus will continue in the future, but embracing more farmed fish, reptiles and invertebrates, and placing its findings within broader international contexts such as environmental and food security concerns. Laboratory animals have been consistently well studied, with a shift in recent years away from primates and towards rodents. Pets, the second largest animal sector after farmed animals, have in contrast been little studied considering their huge populations (cats being especially overlooked): we anticipate research on them increasing in the future. Captive wild animals, especially mammals, have attracted a consistent level of welfare research over the last two decades. Given the many thousands of diverse species kept by zoos, this must, and we predict will, increase. Future challenges and opportunities including refining the use of preference tests, stereotypic behaviour, corticosteroid outputs and putative indicators of positive affect, to enable more valid conclusions about welfare; investigating the evolution and functions of affective states; and last but not least, identifying which taxonomic groups and stages of development are actually sentient and so worthy of welfare concern.

scholarly journals Is Humane Slaughter Possible?

Animals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 799 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather Browning ◽  
Walter Veit
Keyword(s):  
Research And Development ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Animal Agriculture ◽  
Ethical Implications ◽  
Animal Welfare Science ◽  
Pain And Suffering ◽  
Positive Experiences ◽  
Deep Sense

One of the biggest ethical issues in animal agriculture is that of the welfare of animals at the end of their lives, during the process of slaughter. Much work in animal welfare science is focussed on finding humane ways to transport and slaughter animals, to minimise the harm done during this process. In this paper, we take a philosophical look at what it means to perform slaughter humanely, beyond simply reducing pain and suffering during the slaughter process. In particular, we will examine the issue of the harms of deprivation inflicted in ending life prematurely, as well as shape of life concerns and the ethical implications of inflicting these harms at the end of life, without the potential for future offsetting through positive experiences. We will argue that though these considerations may mean that no slaughter is in a deep sense truly ‘humane’, this should not undermine the importance of further research and development to ensure that while the practice continues, animal welfare harms are minimised as far as possible.

Do infants and nonhuman animals attribute mental states?

2018 ◽  
Vol 125 (3) ◽  
pp. 409-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tyler Burge
Keyword(s):  
Mental States ◽  
Nonhuman Animals

scholarly journals PSIV-33 The Animal Welfare Assessment Contest® as a Tool to Promote Animal Welfare Education

2020 ◽  
Vol 98 (Supplement_4) ◽  
pp. 468-468
Author(s):  
Sharon Kuca ◽  
Lindsey McKinney ◽  
Cia Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Educational Tool ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Behavioral Indicators ◽  
Animal Welfare Science ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
Animal Welfare Assessment ◽  
Strongly Agree

Abstract Established in 2001, the Animal Welfare Assessment Contest® (AWJAC®) aims to be an innovative educational tool for enhancing understanding and awareness of welfare issues affecting animals used for human purposes (e.g., research, agriculture, entertainment, companionship). The contest is open to participation by veterinary, undergraduate, and graduate students who may participate as individuals or as part of a team. A limited number of veterinarians are also eligible to compete as non-placing participants. Participation in the contest entails assessment of live and computer-based scenarios encompassing data, photographs, and videos of animals in comparable situations. Students then use the information obtained to rank the welfare of the animals in those situations on the basis of physiologic and behavioral indicators, with attention to facilities and management, and present their analyses orally to expert judges. The species featured change each year of the contest. At the completion of each contest, participants and coaches are asked to anonymously complete a written survey. The quantitative and qualitative results of this survey are used to determine if the contest has achieved its aims and incorporate suggestions for improvement of future contests. The majority of survey respondents from the five contests held between 2014–2018 report they either strongly agree or agree that the AWJAC increased their knowledge of animal welfare science (98%, n = 549) and was an overall valuable experience (99%, n = 547) that they would recommend to their peers (98%, n = 550). Respondents cited networking opportunities and diversity of species featured in the contest as key reasons the contest is valuable. Given these results, the AWJAC is successfully achieving its aims to increase animal welfare knowledge in an innovative way.

scholarly journals The Ethics of Touch and the Importance of Nonhuman Relationships in Animal Agriculture

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Cooke
Keyword(s):  
Stress Reduction ◽  
Animal Ethics ◽  
Physiological Responses ◽  
Animal Agriculture ◽  
Nonhuman Animals ◽  
Social Animals ◽  
Reduction Methods ◽  
Salient Features

AbstractAnimal agriculture predominantly involves farming social animals. At the same time, the nature of agriculture requires severely disrupting, eliminating, and controlling the relationships that matter to those animals, resulting in harm and unhappiness for them. These disruptions harm animals, both physically and psychologically. Stressed animals are also bad for farmers because stressed animals are less safe to handle, produce less, get sick more, and produce poorer quality meat. As a result, considerable efforts have gone into developing stress-reduction methods. Many of these attempt to replicate behaviours or physiological responses that develop or constitute bonding between animals. In other words, humans try to mitigate or ameliorate the damage done by preventing and undermining intraspecies relationships. In doing so, the wrong of relational harms is compounded by an instrumentalisation of trust and care. The techniques used are emblematic of the welfarist approach to animal ethics. Using the example of gentle touching in the farming of cows for beef and dairy, the paper highlights two types of wrong. First, a wrong done in the form of relational harms, and second, a wrong done by instrumentalising relationships of care and trust. Relational harms are done to nonhuman animals, whilst instrumentalisation of care and trust indicates an insensitivity to morally salient features of the situation and a potential character flaw in the agents that carry it out.

Animal welfare science—Working at the interface between the natural and social sciences

2006 ◽  
Vol 97 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vonne Lund ◽  
Grahame Coleman ◽  
Stefan Gunnarsson ◽  
Michael Calvert Appleby ◽  
Katri Karkinen
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Animal Welfare Science ◽  
Science Working
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document