What policy should be adopted to curtail the negative global health impacts associated with the consumption of farmed animal products? [Book Review]

Res Publica 16 (1):57-72 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The negative global health impacts (GHIs) associated with the consumption of farmed animal products are wide-ranging and morally significant. This paper considers four options that policy-makers might adopt to curtail the negative GHIs associated with the consumption of farmed animal products. These options are: 1. to introduce a ban on the consumption of farmed animal products; 2. to increase the costs of farmed animal products; 3. to educate people about the negative GHIs associated with the consumption of farmed animal products; and 4. to introduce a qualified ban on the consumption of farmed animal products. I argue that the fourth option is the most effective and, provided that policy-makers think that the negative GHIs associated with the consumption of farmed animal products are sufficiently great and that a total ban would be unfair, it is the political strategy that must be preferred over the available alternatives.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 74,466

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-03-31

Downloads
60 (#195,746)

6 months
1 (#417,143)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

The Morality of Freedom.Joseph Raz - 1986 - Oxford University Press.
World Poverty and Human Rights.Thomas Pogge - 2002 - Ethics and International Affairs 19 (1):1-7.
The morality of freedom.J. Raz - 1988 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 178 (1):108-109.
World Poverty and Human Rights.Thomas Pogge - 2002 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 6 (4):455-458.

View all 12 references / Add more references