Search results for 'Animal welfare' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Marian S. Dawkins (1990). From an Animal's Point of View: Motivation, Fitness, and Animal Welfare. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (1):1-9.score: 240.0
    To study animal welfare empirically we need an objective basis for deciding when an animal is suffering. Suffering includes a wide range ofunpleasant emotional states such as fear, boredom, pain, and hunger. Suffering has evolved as a mechanism for avoiding sources ofdanger and threats to fitness. Captive animals often suffer in situations in which they are prevented from doing something that they are highly motivated to do. The an animal is prepared to pay to attain or (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Adam Shriver (forthcoming). The Asymmetrical Contributions of Pleasure and Pain To Animal Welfare (Penultimate Draft). Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics.score: 240.0
    Utilitarianism, the ethical doctrine that holds in its most basic form that right actions are those that maximize pleasure and minimize pain, has been at the center of many of the ethical debates around animal welfare. The most well-known utilitarian of our time, Peter Singer, is widely credited with having sparked the animal welfare movement of the past 35+ years, using utilitarian reasoning to argue against using animals in invasive research that we aren’t willing to perform (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. M. Mendl & E. S. Paul (2004). Consciousness, Emotion and Animal Welfare: Insights From Cognitive Science. Animal Welfare 13:17- 25.score: 240.0
  4. S. Kuczaj, K. Tranel, M. Trone & H. Hamner Hill (2001). Are Animals Capable of Deception or Empathy? Implications for Animal Consciousness and Animal Welfare. Animal Welfare. Special Issue 10:161- 173.score: 240.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. David Fraser (2008). Understanding Animal Welfare: The Science in its Cultural Context. Wiley-Blackwell.score: 240.0
    A unique and thought-provoking exploration of the complex and often contradictory field of animal welfare science.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. David J. Mellor (2009). The Sciences of Animal Welfare. Wiley-Blackwell.score: 240.0
    Focus of animal welfare -- Agricultural sciences and animal welfare : crop production and animal production -- Veterinary science and animal welfare -- Genetics, biotechnology, and breeding : mixed blessings -- Animal welfare, grading compromise, and mitigating suffering -- Standardised behavioural testing in non-verbal humans and other animals -- Human-animal interactions and animal welfare -- Environmental enrichment : studying the nature of nurture -- Societal contexts of animal (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. C. R. W. Spedding (2000). Animal Welfare. Earthscan Publications.score: 240.0
    This book charts new ground, specifically, in its negotiation of a definition of animal welfare, in its systematic discussion of the organizations actually ...
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Andrea Bradley & Rod MacRae (2011). Legitimacy & Canadian Farm Animal Welfare Standards Development: The Case of the National Farm Animal Care Council. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (1):19-47.score: 240.0
    Awareness of farm animal welfare issues is growing in Canada, as part of a larger food movement. The baseline Canadian standards for farm animal welfare—the Recommended Codes of Practice for the Care and Handling of Farm Animals—are up for revision. The success of these standards will depend in part on perceived legitimacy, which helps determine whether voluntary code systems are adopted, implemented, and accepted by target audiences. In the context of the Codes, legitimacy will also hinge (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Anne Algers, Berner Lindström & Edmond Pajor (2011). A New Format for Learning About Farm Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (4):367-379.score: 240.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Jenny Bergqvist & Stefan Gunnarsson (2013). Finfish Aquaculture: Animal Welfare, the Environment, and Ethical Implications. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (1):75-99.score: 240.0
    The aim of this review is to assess the ethical implications of finfish aquaculture, regarding fish welfare and environmental aspects. The finfish aquaculture industry has grown substantially the last decades, both as a result of the over-fishing of wild fish populations, and because of the increasing consumer demand for fish meat. As the industry is growing, a significant amount of research on the subject is being conducted, monitoring the effects of aquaculture on the environment and on animal (...). The areas of concern when it comes to animal welfare have here been divided into four different stages: breeding period; growth period; capturing and handling; and slaughter. Besides these stages, this report includes a chapter on the current evidence of fish sentience, since this issue is still being debated among biologists. However, most biologists are at present acknowledging the probability of fish being sentient creatures. Current aquaculture practices are affecting fish welfare during all four of the cited stages, both on physical and mental levels, as well as on the ability of fish to carry out natural behaviors. The effect fish farming has on the environment is here separated into five different categories: the decline of wild fish populations; waste and chemical discharge; loss of habitat; spreading of diseases; and invasion of exotic organisms. There is evidence of severe negative effects on the environment when looking at these five categories, even when considering the difficulty of studying environmental effects, due to the closely interacting variables. The ethical arguments and scientific evidences here reviewed have not all come to the same conclusions. Nevertheless, the general agreement is that current aquaculture practices are neither meeting the needs of fish nor environment. Thus, the obvious environmental and animal welfare aspects of finfish aquaculture make it hard to ethically defend a fish diet. (shrink)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Arianna Ferrari (2012). Animal Disenhancement for Animal Welfare: The Apparent Philosophical Conundrums and the Real Exploitation of Animals. A Response to Thompson and Palmer. [REVIEW] NanoEthics 6 (1):65-76.score: 240.0
    Abstract In his paper “The Opposite of Human Enhancement: Nanotechnology and the Blind Chicken problem” ( Nanoethics 2: 305-36, 2008) Thompson argued that technological attempts to reduce or eliminate selected non-human animals’ capabilities (animal disenhancements) in order to solve or mitigate animal welfare problems in animals’ use pose a philosophical conundrum, because there is a contradiction between rational arguments in favor of these technological interventions and intuitions against them. In her response “Animal Disenhancement and the Non-Identity (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Edmond A. Pajor (2011). A New Format for Learning About Farm Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (4):367-379.score: 240.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Stefan Aerts, Dirk Lips, Stuart Spencer, Eddy Decuypere & Johan De Tavernier (2006). A New Framework for the Assessment of Animal Welfare: Integrating Existing Knowledge From a Practical Ethics Perspective. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (1):67-76.score: 240.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Ellen-Marie Forsberg (2011). Inspiring Respect for Animals Through the Law? Current Development in the Norwegian Animal Welfare Legislation. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (4):351-366.score: 240.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. M. R. N. Bruijnis, F. L. B. Meijboom & E. N. Stassen (2013). Longevity as an Animal Welfare Issue Applied to the Case of Foot Disorders in Dairy Cattle. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (1):191-205.score: 240.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Vonne Lund & Helena Röcklinsberg (2001). Outlining a Conception of Animal Welfare for Organic Farming Systems. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (4):391-424.score: 240.0
    The concept of animal welfare refersto the animal''s quality of life. The choice ofdefinition always reflects some basicvaluation. This makes a particular conceptionof welfare value-dependent. Also, the animalhusbandry system reflects certain values oraims. The values reflected in the chosenconception of animal welfare ought tocorrespond to values aimed for in the husbandrysystem. The IFOAM Basic Standards and otherwritings dealing with organic animal husbandryshould be taken as a departure point for adiscussion of how to interpret (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Stefan Mann (2005). Ethological Farm Programs and the “Market” for Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (4):369-382.score: 240.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Rodrigue El Balaa & Michel Marie (2006). Animal Welfare Considerations in Small Ruminant Breeding Specifications. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (1):91-102.score: 240.0
    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. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Hein Te Velde, Noelle Aarts & Cees Van Woerkum (2002). Dealing with Ambivalence: Farmers' and Consumers' Perceptions of Animal Welfare in Livestock Breeding. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15 (2):203-219.score: 240.0
    The results of an empirical study intoperceptions of the treatment of farm animals inthe Netherlands are presented. A qualitativeapproach, based on in-depth interviews withmeat livestock farmers and consumers was chosenin order to assess motivations behindperceptions and to gain insight into the waypeople deal with possible discrepancies betweentheir perceptions and their daily practices.Perceptions are analyzed with the help of aframe of reference, which consists ofvalues, norms, convictions, interests, andknowledge.The perceptions of the interviewed farmersare quite consistent and without exceptionpositive: according to them, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. M. B. M. Bracke, J. H. M. Metz, A. A. Dijkhuizen & B. M. Spruijt (2001). Development of a Decision Support System for Assessing Farm Animal Welfare in Relation to Husbandry Systems: Strategy and Prototype. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (3):321-337.score: 240.0
    Due to increasing empiricalinformation on farm animal welfare since the1960s, the prospects for sound decisionmakingconcerning welfare have improved. This paperdescribes a strategy to develop adecision-making aid, a decision support system,for assessment of farm-animal welfare based onavailable scientific knowledge. Such a decisionsupport system allows many factors to be takeninto account. It is to be developed accordingto the Evolutionary Prototyping Method, inwhich an initial prototype is improved inreiterative updating cycles. This initialprototype has been constructed. It useshierarchical representations (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Daniela Rabbie (2000). Holy Cows: A Look at the Influence of Religious Beliefs on Dairy Animal Welfare on Kibbutzim in Israel. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (3-4):219-227.score: 240.0
    The influence of religious beliefs on people's attitudes andactions in the area of animal welfare was examined by interviewing dairyworkers on kibbutzim (communal agricultural settlements) in Israel.Workers on religiously observant kibbutzim were no more consistent intheir attitudes toward and treatment of dairy cows than workers onnon-observant and selectively observant kibbutzim.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. M. B. M. Bracke & H. Hopster (2006). Assessing the Importance of Natural Behavior for Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (1):77-89.score: 240.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Janneke Jonge & Hans C. M. Trijp (2013). Meeting Heterogeneity in Consumer Demand for Animal Welfare: A Reflection on Existing Knowledge and Implications for the Meat Sector. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (3):629-661.score: 240.0
    The legitimacy of the dominant intensive meat production system with respect to the issue of animal welfare is increasingly being questioned by stakeholders across the meat supply chain. The current meat supply is highly undifferentiated, catering only for the extremes of morality concerns (i.e., conventional vs. organic meat products). However, a latent need for compromise products has been identified. That is, consumer differences exist regarding the trade-offs they make between different aspects associated with meat consumption. The heterogeneity in (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Agnes A. Schot & Clive Phillips (2013). Publication Bias in Animal Welfare Scientific Literature. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (5):945-958.score: 240.0
    Animal welfare scientific literature has accumulated rapidly in recent years, but bias may exist which influences understanding of progress in the field. We conducted a survey of articles related to animal welfare or well being from an electronic database. From 8,541 articles on this topic, we randomly selected 115 articles for detailed review in four funding categories: government; charity and/or scientific association; industry; and educational organization. Ninety articles were evaluated after unsuitable articles were rejected. The (...) states of animals in new treatments, conventional treatments or control groups with no treatment were classified as high, medium or low according to one or more. More articles were published in which the welfare of animals in new treatments was better than that of animals in the conventional or no treatment groups, demonstrating a positive result bias. Failure to publish studies with negative or inconclusive results may lead to other scientists unnecessarily repeating the research. The authors’ assessments of the welfare state of the groups were similarly rated high, medium or low, and it was found that new treatments were rated lower if the research was funded by industry, and higher when funded by charities, with government funding agencies intermediate. These differences were not evident in the Five Freedoms assessment, demonstrating an authors’ assessment bias that appeared to support the funding agencies’ interests. North American funded publications rated the welfare of animals in New treatments higher and those in a Conventional or No Treatment lower, compared with European-funded publications. It is concluded that preliminary evidence was provided of several forms of publication bias in animal welfare science. (shrink)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Filiep Vanhonacker, Wim Verbeke, Els van Poucke, Zuzanna Pieniak, Griet Nijs & Frank Tuyttens (2012). The Concept of Farm Animal Welfare: Citizen Perceptions and Stakeholder Opinion in Flanders, Belgium. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (1):79-101.score: 240.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Albert W. Musschenga (2002). Naturalness: Beyond Animal Welfare. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15 (2):171-186.score: 240.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Theofano Vetouli, Vonne Lund & Brigitte Kaufmann (2012). Farmers' Attitude Towards Animal Welfare Aspects and Their Practice in Organic Dairy Calf Rearing: A Case Study in Selected Nordic Farms. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (3):349-364.score: 240.0
    In organic philosophy, the concept of naturalness is of major importance. According to the organic interpretation of animal welfare, natural living is considered a precondition for accomplishing welfare and the principal aims of organic production include the provision of natural living conditions for animals. However, respective regulations are lacking in organic legislation. In practice, the life of a calf in organic rearing systems can deviate from being natural, since common practices in dairy farms include early weaning, dehorning, (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Karel De Greef, Frans Stafleu & Carolien De Lauwere (2006). A Simple Value-Distinction Approach Aids Transparency in Farm Animal Welfare Debate. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (1):57-66.score: 240.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Steven P. McCulloch (2013). A Critique of FAWC's Five Freedoms as a Framework for the Analysis of Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (5):959-975.score: 240.0
    The Brambell Report of 1965 recommended that animals should have the freedom to stand up, lie down, turn around, groom themselves and stretch their limbs. The Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) developed these into the Five Freedoms, which are a framework for the analysis of animal welfare. The Five Freedoms are well known in farming, policy making and academic circles. They form the basis of much animal welfare legislation, codes of recommendations and farm (...) welfare accreditation schemes, and are the foundation of the Welfare Quality® assessment scheme. The Five Freedoms are also extensively employed for the education of veterinary and animal welfare science students. Hence they have proven to be of great practical utility. In this paper, the Five Freedoms framework is examined in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions for the analysis of animal welfare. Overall, the Five Freedoms are judged to be individually necessary and jointly sufficient as a framework for the analysis of animal welfare. FAWC has recently criticized the Five Freedoms for concentrating on negative aspects of welfare. However, it is shown here how the satisfaction of the Five Freedoms should lead to good welfare, from the animal’s point of view. The Five Freedoms are formulated as ideals of animal welfare. This has significant advantages that have likely contributed to their impact. However, the ideality of the Five Freedoms means that the framework is without power to determine what a satisfactory level of animal welfare is, in an ethical sense. (shrink)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Ryan P. McLaughlin (2012). Non-Violence and Nonhumans: Foundations for Animal Welfare in the Thought of Mohandas Gandhi and Albert Schweitzer. Journal of Religious Ethics 40 (4):678-704.score: 240.0
    This essay explores how the principles of ahimsa and reverence for life provide a foundation for animal welfare in the thought of Mohandas Gandhi and Albert Schweitzer, respectively. This exploration unfolds through a consideration of the contextual background of both thinkers, the scope of life to which they apply their respective principles, and both the ethical ramifications and limitations of this application. Within this common framework, the author delineates the striking commonalities and the significant disparities between Gandhi and (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Filiep Vanhonacker, Els Van Poucke, Frank Tuyttens & Wim Verbeke (2010). Citizens' Views on Farm Animal Welfare and Related Information Provision: Exploratory Insights From Flanders, Belgium. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23 (6):551-569.score: 240.0
    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 (...) 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. (shrink)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. M. B. M. Bracke, K. H. De Greef & H. Hopster (2005). Qualitative Stakeholder Analysis for the Development of Sustainable Monitoring Systems for Farm Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (1):27-56.score: 240.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Courtney Lynd Daigle (2014). Incorporating the Philosophy of Technology Into Animal Welfare Assessment. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 27 (4):633-647.score: 240.0
    Changes in attitudes towards how animals are housed in agriculture are currently under question in the public eye—particularly for laying hens. Many arguments from the rights and utilitarian viewpoints have been made for changing environmental conditions and managerial practices for animals in an effort to respect the interests of the animal and better their welfare. Yet, these arguments have been based upon belief systems that were developed from information that can be collected by human perception only. Technological advancements (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. É Gocsik, H. W. Saatkamp, C. C. De Lauwere & A. G. J. M. Oude Lansink (2014). A Conceptual Approach for a Quantitative Economic Analysis of Farmers' Decision-Making Regarding Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 27 (2):287-308.score: 240.0
    Decisions related to animal welfare (AW) standards depend on farmer’s multiple goals and values and are constrained by a wide range of external and internal forces. The aim of this paper is twofold, i.e., (1) to develop a theoretical framework for farmers’ AW decisions that incorporates farmers’ goals, use and non-use values and (2) to present an approach to empirically implement the theoretical framework. The farmer as a head of the farm household makes choices regarding production to maximize (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Alexandra Wells, Joanne Sneddon, Julie Lee & Dominique Blache (2011). Farmer's Response to Societal Concerns About Farm Animal Welfare: The Case of Mulesing. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (6):645-658.score: 240.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Janneke de Jonge & Hans Cm van Trijp (2013). Meeting Heterogeneity in Consumer Demand for Animal Welfare: A Reflection on Existing Knowledge and Implications for the Meat Sector. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (3):629-661.score: 240.0
    The legitimacy of the dominant intensive meat production system with respect to the issue of animal welfare is increasingly being questioned by stakeholders across the meat supply chain. The current meat supply is highly undifferentiated, catering only for the extremes of morality concerns (i.e., conventional vs. organic meat products). However, a latent need for compromise products has been identified. That is, consumer differences exist regarding the trade-offs they make between different aspects associated with meat consumption. The heterogeneity in (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Eve Hartman (2012). Do Scientists Care About Animal Welfare? Raintree.score: 240.0
    Looks at animal welfare in society and the sciences, including laboratory animals, pets, and the effect of climate change.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Lennart Ravn Heerwagen, Morten Raun Mørkbak, Sigrid Denver, Peter Sandøe & Tove Christensen (forthcoming). The Role of Quality Labels in Market-Driven Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics:1-18.score: 240.0
    In policy-making the consumption of specially labelled products, and its role in improving the welfare of livestock, has attracted considerable attention. There is in many countries a diverse market for animal welfare-friendly products which is potentially confusing and may lack transparency. We ask whether special quality labels that involve medium levels of animal welfare, as compared with labels promoting premium levels of animal welfare, have a role to play in promoting improvements in (...) welfare. The Danish pork market is our reference case, but we also widen the context by comparing the markets for pork in three other European countries. Our findings suggest that in order to improve animal welfare through demand for welfare-friendly products it is important to maintain separate the market for products with strong animal welfare profiles from markets for products with medium levels of animal welfare where, often, animal welfare is bundled together with other food quality attributes. We conclude that such quality labels may indeed play an important role in promoting higher animal welfare standards provided that they offer real improvements in animal welfare as compared with standard products. They will be attractive to consumers with a positive, but not especially strong interest in animal welfare as an individual food attribute who would otherwise be inclined to purchase standard products. (shrink)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Frida Lundmark, C. Berg, O. Schmid, D. Behdadi & H. Röcklinsberg (forthcoming). Intentions and Values in Animal Welfare Legislation and Standards. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics:1-27.score: 240.0
    The focus on animal welfare in society has increased during the last 50 years. Animal welfare legislation and private standards have developed, and today many farmers within animal production have both governmental legislation and private standards to comply with. In this paper intentions and values are described that were expressed in 14 animal welfare legislation and standards in four European countries; Sweden, United Kingdom, Germany and Spain. It is also discussed if the legislation (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. C. J. C. Phillips & J. C. Petherick (forthcoming). The Ethics of a Co-Regulatory Model for Farm Animal Welfare Research. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics:1-16.score: 240.0
    Standards for farm animal welfare are variously managed at a national level by government-led regulatory control, by consumer-led welfare economics and co-regulated control in a partnership between industry and government. In the latter case the control of research to support animal welfare standards by the relevant industry body may lead to a conflict of interest on the part of researchers, who are dependent on industry for continued research funding. We examine this dilemma by reviewing two (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Jeffrey M. Spooner, Catherine A. Schuppli & David Fraser (2014). Attitudes of Canadian Pig Producers Toward Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 27 (4):569-589.score: 240.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Agnes A. van der Schot & Clive Phillips (2013). Publication Bias in Animal Welfare Scientific Literature. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (5):945-958.score: 240.0
    Animal welfare scientific literature has accumulated rapidly in recent years, but bias may exist which influences understanding of progress in the field. We conducted a survey of articles related to animal welfare or well being from an electronic database. From 8,541 articles on this topic, we randomly selected 115 articles for detailed review in four funding categories: government; charity and/or scientific association; industry; and educational organization. Ninety articles were evaluated after unsuitable articles were rejected. The (...) states of animals in new treatments, conventional treatments or control groups with no treatment were classified as high, medium or low according to one or more. More articles were published in which the welfare of animals in new treatments was better than that of animals in the conventional or no treatment groups, demonstrating a positive result bias. Failure to publish studies with negative or inconclusive results may lead to other scientists unnecessarily repeating the research. The authors’ assessments of the welfare state of the groups were similarly rated high, medium or low, and it was found that new treatments were rated lower if the research was funded by industry, and higher when funded by charities, with government funding agencies intermediate. These differences were not evident in the Five Freedoms assessment, demonstrating an authors’ assessment bias that appeared to support the funding agencies’ interests. North American funded publications rated the welfare of animals in New treatments higher and those in a Conventional or No Treatment lower, compared with European-funded publications. It is concluded that preliminary evidence was provided of several forms of publication bias in animal welfare science. (shrink)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. James Yeates (2013). Animal Welfare in Veterinary Practice. Wiley-Blackwell.score: 240.0
    Patients -- Clients -- Welfare assessment -- Clinical choices -- Achieving animal welfare goals -- Beyond the clinic.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Peter J. Li (2009). Exponential Growth, Animal Welfare, Environmental and Food Safety Impact: The Case of China's Livestock Production. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 22 (3):217-240.score: 234.0
    Developmental states are criticized for rapid “industrialization without enlightenment.” In the last 30 years, China’s breathtaking growth has been achieved at a high environmental and food safety cost. This article, utilizing a recent survey of China’s livestock industry, illustrates the initiating role of China’s developmental state in the exponential expansion of the country’s livestock production. The enthusiastic response of the livestock industry to the many state policy incentives has made China the world’s biggest animal farming nation. Shortage of meat (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Richard P. Haynes (2001). Do Regulators of Animal Welfare Need to Develop a Theory of Psychological Well-Being? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (2):231-240.score: 234.0
    The quest for a ``theory of nonhuman minds'''' to assessclaims about the moral status of animals is misguided. Misframedquestions about animal minds facilitate the appropriation ofanimal welfare by the animal user industry. When misframed, thesequestions shift the burden of proof unreasonably to animalwelfare regulators. An illustrative instance of misframing can befound in the US National Research Council''s 1998 publication thatreports professional efforts to define the psychologicalwell-being of nonhuman primates, a condition that the US 1985animal welfare act (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Dita Wickins-Dražilová (2006). Zoo Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (1):27-36.score: 228.0
    The continuing existence of zoos and their good purposes such as conservation, science, education, and recreation, can be ethically justified only if zoos guarantee the welfare of their animals. The usual criteria for measuring animal welfare in zoos are physical health, long life, and reproduction. This paper looks at these criteria and finds them insufficient. Additional criteria are submitted to expand the range of welfare considerations: natural and abnormal behavior; freedom and choice; and dignity. All these (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Dita Wickins-Drazilova (2006). Zoo Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (1):27-36.score: 228.0
    The continuing existence of zoos and their good purposes such as conservation, science, education, and recreation, can be ethically justified only if zoos guarantee the welfare of their animals. The usual criteria for measuring animal welfare in zoos are physical health, long life, and reproduction. This paper looks at these criteria and finds them insufficient. Additional criteria are submitted to expand the range of welfare considerations: natural and abnormal behavior; freedom and choice; and dignity. All these (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. John Webster (2005). Animal Welfare: Limping Towards Eden: A Practical Approach to Redressing the Problem of Our Dominion Over the Animals. Blackwell Pub..score: 222.0
    Introduction: Facts and values -- Challenge and response -- Sentience, sense, and suffering -- Husbandry and welfare on the farm : assessment and assurance -- Animals for food : industrialised farming, pigs, and poultry -- Animals for food : cattle and other ruminants -- Animals for food : handling, transport, and slaughter -- Animals, science, and biotechnology -- Animals for sport -- Animals for pets -- Limping towards Eden : stepping stones.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Stephanie Yue Cottee & Paul Petersan (2009). Animal Welfare and Organic Aquaculture in Open Systems. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 22 (5):437-461.score: 222.0
    The principles of organic farming espouse a holistic approach to agriculture that promotes sustainable and harmonious relationships amongst the natural environment, plants, and animals, as well as regard for animals’ physiological and behavioral needs. However, open aquaculture systems—both organic and conventional—present unresolved and significant challenges to the welfare of farmed and wild fish, as well as other wildlife, and to environmental integrity, due to water quality issues, escapes, parasites, predator control, and feed-source sustainability. Without addressing these issues, it is (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Francine L. Dolins (ed.) (1999). Attitudes to Animals: Views in Animal Welfare. Cambridge University Press.score: 216.0
    This thought-provoking book will ask what it is to be human, what to be animal, and what are the natures of the relationships between them. This is accomplished with philosophical and ethical discussions, scientific evidence and dynamic theoretical approaches. Attitudes to Animals will also encourage us to think not only of our relationships to non-human animals, but also of those to other, human, animals. This book provides a foundation that the reader can use to make ethical choices about animals. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000