Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Pluralist–Expressivist Critique of the Pet Trade

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Elizabeth Anderson’s “pluralist–expressivist” value theory, an alternative to the understanding of value and rationality underlying the “rational actor” model of human behavior, provides rich resources for addressing questions of environmental and animal ethics. It is particularly well-suited to help us think about the ethics of commodification, as I demonstrate in this critique of the pet trade. I argue that Anderson’s approach identifies the proper grounds for criticizing the commodification of animals, and directs our attention to the importance of maintaining social practices and institutions that respect the social meanings of animals. Her theory alone, however, does not adequately address the role of the state in this project. Drawing on social contract theory to fill this gap, I conclude that the state’s role in regulating the pet trade should be limited to ensuring the welfare of animals in the stream of commerce, not prohibiting their mass marketing altogether.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, B., & Larson, J. (2007). Animal welfare act legislative history. Accessed December 15, 2008, from http://www.nal.usda/awic/pubs/AWA2007.

  • American Pet Products Association. (2008). Industry statistics and trends. Accessed December 15, 2008, from http://americanpetproducts.org/press_industrytrends.asp.

  • Anderson, E. (1993). Value in ethics and economics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, E. (2004a). Animal rights and the values of nonhuman life. In C. Sunstein & M. Nussbaum (Eds.), Animal rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, V. (2004b). Creatures of empire. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Animal Protection Institute. (2005). Little shop of sorrows (n.p.).

  • Animal Welfare Act. United States Code, Vol. 7, Sec. 2131 et seq.

  • Arkansas Retail Pet Store Consumer Protection Act of 1991. Ar. Stat. 4-97-107(b).

  • Bartlett, P., Bartlett, A., Walshaw, S., Halstead, S., et al. (2005). Rates of euthanasia and adoption for dogs and cats in Michigan animal shelters. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 8, 97–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Born Free USA and Animal Protection Institute. (2008a). Take action: How you can help. Accessed December 29, 2008, from http://www.api4animals.org/a5a4_action.php.

  • Born Free USA and Animal Protection Institute. (2008b). The current state of pet shop laws. Accessed December 2008, from http://www.api4animals.org/b4a1_petshoplaws_currentstate.php.

  • Bulcroft, K. (1990). Pets in the American family. People, Animals, Environment, 8, 13–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Companion Animal Protection Society. (2007). CAPS puppy mill investigation reports. Accessed December 16, 2008, from http://www.caps-web.org/investigations.php.

  • Companion Animal Protection Society. (2008). Companion animal protection society plans nationwide protest. Accessed December 16, 2008, from http://www.caps-web.org/get_article.php?id=61.

  • Francione, G. (1995). Animals, property and the law. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grier, K. (2006). Pets in America. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris Interactive. (2007, December 4). Pets are “members of the family” and two-thirds of pet owners buy their pets holiday presents. Harris Poll #120.

  • Hearne, V. (1994). Animal happiness. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humane Society of the United States. (2008). Puppy-buying tips. Accessed December 15, 2008, from http://www.stoppuppymills.org/puppy_buying_tips.html.

  • Interlandi, J. (2008). PETA and euthanasia. Newsweek.

  • Italiano, L. (1996, September 22). $4.4 M puppy mill scandal. New York Post.

  • Kalaygian, M. (2008). Regulatory and legislative issues at every level of government present a formidable challenge to the pet industry. Accessed December 15, 2008, from www.petbusiness.com/?pg=contents&spg=cover.story.

  • Kikuchi, M., McBride, E. A., Reilly, J., & Marvin, G. D. (2007). A comparison of attitudes towards dogs: A␣study of articles and advertisements in Japan and UK dog magazines. Presented at the 11th International Conference on Human–Animal Interactions, Tokyo, Japan. October 5–8, 2007.

  • Martin, B. (2008, January). Lending to pet stores: Changing attitudes towards pets mean higher spending. Commercial Lending Review, n.v., 39–43.

  • Midgley, M. (1983). Animals and why they matter. Athens: University of Georgia Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Navarro, M. (1997, 14 September). After movies, unwanted Dalmations. New York Times.

  • Nussbaum, M. (2006). Frontiers of justice. Cambridge: Belknap Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parfit, D. (1984). Reason and persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, S. (2004). The rights of the defenseless: Animals, children and sentimental liberalism in nineteenth-century America. Dissertation, University of North Carolina.

  • Petco. (2008a). Pet adoptions. Accessed December 29, 2008, from http://www.petco.com/petco_Page_PC_petadoptionshome_Nav_313.aspx.

  • Petco. (2008b). Company info. Accessed December 29, 2008, from http://www.petco.com/Content/Content.aspx?PC=companyinfo&Nav=142.

  • Pet Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act. (2006). U.S. statutes at large (Vol. 120, p. 1725).

  • PetSmart. (2008). Adoptions. Accessed December 16, 2008, from http://adoptions.petsmart.com/about-us/index.php.

  • Pollan, M. (2006). The omnivore’s dilemma. New York: Penguin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (2005). Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raz, J. (1986). The morality of freedom. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reaser, J., & Meyers, M. (2006). Doing it right. Washington, DC: Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritvo, H. (1987). The animal estate. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogelberg, S., DiGiacomo, N., Reeve, C., Spitzmuller, C., Clark, O., Teeter, L., et al. (2007). What shelters can do about euthanasia-related stress: An examination of recommendations from those on the front lines. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 10, 331–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sewell, A. (1877). Black beauty. Chicago: M.A. Donohue.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. (2008). Animals and the social contract: A reply to Nussbaum. Environmental Ethics, 30, 195–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C. (2000). A tribute to Kenneth L. Karst: Standing for animals (with notes on animal rights). UCLA Law Review, 47, 1333–1368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K. (1983). Man and the natural world. New York: Pantheon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. (2004). Getting pragmatic about farm animal welfare. In E. McKenna & A. Light (Eds.), Animal pragmatism (pp. 140–155). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for the Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics for their comments. This project also benefited from conversations with Laurence Cooper, Melvin Rogers, Julia Smith, and numerous other pet lovers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Science, Carleton College, Northfield, 55057, MN, USA

    Kimberly K. Smith

Authors
  1. Kimberly K. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kimberly K. Smith.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Smith, K.K. A Pluralist–Expressivist Critique of the Pet Trade. J Agric Environ Ethics 22, 241–256 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-009-9145-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-009-9145-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation