David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (2):181-197 (2004)
Most discussions on animal experimentation refer to domesticated animals and regulations are tailored to this class of animals. However, wild animals are also used for research, e.g., in biological field research that is often directed to fundamental ecological-evolutionary questions or to conservation goals. There are several differences between domesticated and wild animals that are relevant for evaluation of the acceptability of animal experiments. Biological features of wild animals are often more critical as compared with domesticated animals because of their survival effects. An important issue is what is called here ``natural suffering'''': the suffering from natural circumstances. Should this type of suffering be taken into account when suffering from experimentation is evaluated? As an answer, it is suggested that ``natural functioning'''' should be considered as an additional standard in the evaluation of wild animal experimentation. Finally, two topics related to the ecological context are considered. Firstly, the often inevitable involvement of non-research animals in wild animal experimentation, and secondly, the eco-centric approach to nature conservation. According to the latter position, animals are subordinated to ecosystems. All these aspects make the evaluation of wild animal experiments much more complex than experiments with domesticated animals. Preliminary scores are proposed to deal with these aspects. It is argued that this should not lead to a more complex governmental regulation, since an effective maintenance and control are hard to realize and one may loose the cooperation of researchers themselves. In addition, non-governmental professional organizations such as research societies and funding organizations play a pivotal role.
|Keywords||animal experimentation animal welfare domesticated animals field biological research natural functioning natural suffering wild animals|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Ben A. Minteer & James P. Collins (2008). From Environmental to Ecological Ethics: Toward a Practical Ethics for Ecologists and Conservationists. Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (4):483-501.
Aysel Dog˘an (2011). A Defense of Animal Rights. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (5):473-491.
Similar books and articles
Kathy Rudy (2011). Loving Animals: Toward a New Animal Advocacy. Univ of Minnesota Press.
Eileen O'Rourke (2000). The Reintroduction and Reinterpretation of the Wild. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (1):144-165.
Mark H. Bernstein (2004). Without a Tear: Our Tragic Relationship with Animals. University of Illinois Press.
Joel Marks (2010). Live Free or Die. [REVIEW] Animal Law 17 (1):243-250.
Claire Molloy (2011). Popular Media and Animals. Palgrave Macmillan.
Brian Schrag (2004). Commentary on “the Gladiator Sparrow: Ethical Issues in Behavioral Research on Captive Populations of Wild Animals”. Science and Engineering Ethics 10 (4):726-730.
H. Verhoog (1992). The Concept of Intrinsic Value and Transgenic Animals. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 5 (2):147-160.
Jac Swart & Jozef Keulartz (2011). Wild Animals in Our Backyard. A Contextual Approach to the Intrinsic Value of Animals. Acta Biotheoretica 59 (2):185-200.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads26 ( #142,242 of 1,789,927 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #317,270 of 1,789,927 )
How can I increase my downloads?