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

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Courtney Lynd Daigle (2014). Incorporating the Philosophy of Technology Into Animal Welfare Assessment. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 27 (4):633-647.score: 702.0
    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  
  2. Elisa Aaltola (2012). Animal Suffering: Philosophy and Culture. Palgrave Macmillan.score: 426.0
    Animal Suffering: Philosophy and Culture explores the multifaceted moral meanings allocated to non-human suffering in contemporary Western culture.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. 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: 381.0
    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, (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Deborah Cao (2011). Visibility and Invisibility of Animals in Traditional Chinese Philosophy and Law. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 24 (3):351-367.score: 351.0
    There is yet to be any animal welfare or protection law for domestic animals in China, one of the few countries in the world today that do not have such laws. However, in Chinese imperial law, there were legal provisions adopted more than a 1,000 years ago for the care and treatment of domestic working animals. Furthermore, in traditional Chinese philosophy, animals were regarded as constituent part of the organic whole of the cosmos by ancient Chinese philosophers (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Czesław Radzikowski (2006). Protection of Animal Research Subjects. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (1):103-110.score: 306.0
    The use of experimental animals, mostly rodents, in biomedical research and especially in oncology and immunology should be acknowledged with respect, recognizing the contribution of animal experimentation in the fascinating scientific progress in these disciplines of research. It is an obligation of the investigator to justify the scientific and ethical aspects of each study requiring the use of animals. The international guiding principles for using animals in biomedical research are well defined and have been distributed worldwide by the International (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Raymond Anthony (2007). Animal Welfare, Trust, Governance, and the Public Good. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 1:275-280.score: 306.0
    Pragmatic philosophy and discourse ethics are offered as an alternative way to respond to and understand the concerns of philosophical animal ethics and animal welfare science, especially as they relate to ethical decision-making and democratic participation in today's technical animal agriculture. The two major challenges facing philosophical animal ethics and animal welfare are: the acceptability of alienating individual animals from their genetic and social identities through practices that seek to alter their genome (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Yew-Kwang Ng (1995). Towards Welfare Biology: Evolutionary Economics of Animal Consciousness and Suffering. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 10 (3):255-285.score: 303.0
    Welfare biology is the study of living things and their environment with respect to their welfare (defined as net happiness, or enjoyment minus suffering). Despite difficulties of ascertaining and measuring welfare and relevancy to normative issues, welfare biology is a positive science. Evolutionary economics and population dynamics are used to help answer basic questions in welfare biology: Which species are affective sentients capable of welfare? Do they enjoy positive or negative welfare? Can their (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Marcel Dol (ed.) (1999). Recognizing the Intrinsic Value of Animals: Beyond Animal Welfare. Van Gorcum.score: 300.0
    Introduction Moral concern for animals is commonly formulated in terms of concern for their welfare. Yet, besides the welfare issue, although highly ...
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Paul B. Thompson (2013). F. Bailey Norwood and Jayson L. Lusk: Compassion by the Pound: The Economics of Farm Animal Welfare. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (2):517-521.score: 297.0
    F. Bailey Norwood and Jayson L. Lusk: Compassion by the Pound: The Economics of Farm Animal Welfare Content Type Journal Article Category Book Review Pages 1-5 DOI 10.1007/s10806-012-9377-z Authors Paul B. Thompson, WK Kellogg Professor of Agricultural, Food and Community Ethics, Department of Philosophy, Michigan State University, 503 South Kedzie Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824-1032, USA Journal Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Online ISSN 1573-322X Print ISSN 1187-7863.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Andrew Linzey (2009). Why Animal Suffering Matters: Philosophy, Theology, and Practical Ethics. Oxford University Press.score: 273.0
    Introduction: Reason, ethics, and animals -- Part I: Making the rational case -- Why animal suffering matters morally -- How we minimize animal suffering and how we can change -- Part II: Three practical critiques -- First case: Hunting with dogs -- Second case: Fur farming -- Third case: Commercial sealing -- Conclusion: Re-establishing animals and children as a common cause and six objections considered.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Mylan Engel (2010). The Philosophy of Animal Rights: A Brief Introduction for Students and Teachers. Lantern Books.score: 264.0
    The book also contains an extensive bibliography of references and philosophical resources.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. L. W. Sumner (1988). Animal Welfare and Animal Rights. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 13 (2):159-175.score: 261.0
    Animal liberationists tend to divide into two mutually antagonistic camps: animal welfarists, who share a utilitarian moral outlook, and animal rightists, who presuppose a structure of basic rights. However, the gap between these groups tends to be exaggerated by their allegiance to oversimplified versions of their favored moral frameworks. For their part, animal rightists should acknowledge that rights, however basic, are also defeasible by appeals to consequences. Contrariwise, animal welfarists should recognize that rights, however derivative, (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Frank Schalow (2000). Who Speaks for the Animals?: Heidegger and the Question of Animal Welfare. Environmental Ethics 22 (3):259-271.score: 261.0
    I address the ethical treatment of animals from a Heideggerian perspective. My argument proceeds in two stages. First, it is necessary to develop a nonanthropocentric concept of freedom which extends beyond the sphere of human interests. Second, it is essential to show that our capacity to speak must serve the diverse ends of “dwelling,” and hence can be properly exercised only by balancing the interests of animals with those of our own. Rather than point to naturalistic similarities between humans and (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Stephen St C. Bostock (1993). Zoos and Animal Rights: The Ethics of Keeping Animals. Routledge.score: 228.0
    Zoos and animal rights seem utterly opposed to each other. In this controversial and timely book, Stephen Bostock argues that they can develop a more harmonious relationship. He examines the diverse ethical and technical issues involved, including human cruelty, human domination over animals, the well-being of wild animals outside their natural habitat, and the nature of wild and domestic animals. In his analysis, Bostock draws attention to the areas which give rise to misconceptions. This book explores the long history (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Richard Sorabji (1993). Animal Minds and Human Morals: The Origins of the Western Debate. Cornell University Press.score: 228.0
    Animal Minds and Human Morals sheds new light on traditional arguments surrounding the status of animals while pointing beyond them to current moral dilemmas.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Catherine Osborne (2007/2009). Dumb Beasts and Dead Philosophers: Humanity and the Humane in Ancient Philosophy and Literature. Oxford University Press.score: 228.0
    The book is about three things. First, how Ancient thinkers perceived humans as like or unlike other animals; second about the justification for taking a humane attitude towards natural things; and third about how moral claims count as true, and how they can be discovered or acquired. Was Aristotle was right to see continuity in the psychological functions of animal and human souls? The question cannot be settled without taking a moral stance. As we can either focus on continuity (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Andrew Fenton (2012). On the Need to Redress an Inadequacy in Animal Welfare Science: Toward an Internally Coherent Framework. Biology and Philosophy 27 (1):73-93.score: 228.0
    The time is ripe for a greater interrogation of assumptions and commitments underlying an emerging common ground on the ethics of animal research as well on the 3 R (replacement, refinement, reduction) approach that parallels, and perhaps even further shapes, it. Recurring pressures to re-evaluate the moral status of some animals in research comes as much from within the relevant sciences as without. It seems incredible, in the light of what we now know of such animals as chimpanzees, to (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Lori Gruen (2011). Ethics and Animals: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press.score: 225.0
    In this fresh and comprehensive introduction to animal ethics, Lori Gruen weaves together poignant and provocative case studies with discussions of ethical theory, urging readers to engage critically and empathetically reflect on our treatment of other animals. In clear and accessible language, Gruen provides a survey of the issues central to human-animal relations and a reasoned new perspective on current key debates in the field. She analyses and explains a range of theoretical positions and poses challenging questions that (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. 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: 224.0
    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  
  20. Adam Shriver (forthcoming). The Asymmetrical Contributions of Pleasure and Pain To Animal Welfare (Penultimate Draft). Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics.score: 224.0
    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  
  21. M. Mendl & E. S. Paul (2004). Consciousness, Emotion and Animal Welfare: Insights From Cognitive Science. Animal Welfare 13:17- 25.score: 224.0
  22. 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: 224.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. David Fraser (2008). Understanding Animal Welfare: The Science in its Cultural Context. Wiley-Blackwell.score: 224.0
    A unique and thought-provoking exploration of the complex and often contradictory field of animal welfare science.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. David J. Mellor (2009). The Sciences of Animal Welfare. Wiley-Blackwell.score: 224.0
    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  
  25. C. R. W. Spedding (2000). Animal Welfare. Earthscan Publications.score: 224.0
    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  
  26. 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: 224.0
    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  
  27. 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: 224.0
    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  
  28. Edmond A. Pajor (2011). A New Format for Learning About Farm Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (4):367-379.score: 224.0
    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  
  29. 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: 224.0
    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  
  30. 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: 224.0
    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  
  31. 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: 224.0
    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  
  32. 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: 224.0
    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  
  33. 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: 224.0
    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  
  34. 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: 224.0
    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  
  35. Stefan Mann (2005). Ethological Farm Programs and the “Market” for Animal Welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (4):369-382.score: 224.0
    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  
  36. 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: 224.0
    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  
  37. 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: 224.0
    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  
  38. 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: 224.0
    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  
  39. 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: 224.0
    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  
  40. 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: 224.0
    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  
  41. 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: 224.0
    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  
  42. Agnes A. Schot & Clive Phillips (2013). Publication Bias in Animal Welfare Scientific Literature. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (5):945-958.score: 224.0
    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  
  43. 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: 224.0
    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  
  44. Albert W. Musschenga (2002). Naturalness: Beyond Animal Welfare. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15 (2):171-186.score: 224.0
    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  
  45. 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: 224.0
    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  
  46. 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: 224.0
    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  
  47. 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: 224.0
    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  
  48. 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: 224.0
    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  
  49. 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: 224.0
    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  
  50. 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: 224.0
    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  
1 — 50 / 1000