No abstract

An important line of scholarship concludes that stemming the biodiversity crisis requires widespread nonanthropocentric modes of action and decision-making. In this regard, knowing what would even constitute a nonanthropocentric economic decision-making framework is hobbled by failing to recognize a conflation in the taxonomy of capital as supposed by traditional (anthropocentric) economics. We explain how natural capital (a basic category in anthropocentric economies) conflates natural capital without intrinsic value and natural capital with intrinsic value. Recognizing this conflation allowed us to identify instances of quantitative analyses that have elements of nonanthropocentrism but that seem not to have been previously recognized as such. We also explore inescapable consequences of recognizing this conflation, including the need to better understand how economic decision-making should take account for interspecies distributive justice and human well-being. That second need augments independent calls by economists and policy experts to take better account of human well-being.

Judgments about acceptable risk in the context of policy may be influenced by law makers, policy makers, experts and the general public. While significant effort has been made to understand public attitudes on acceptable risk of environmental pollution, little is known about such attitudes in the context of species' endangerment. We present survey results on these attitudes in the context of United States' legal-political apparatus intended to mitigate species endangerment. The results suggest that the general public exhibit lower tolerance for risk than policy makers and experts. Results also suggest that attitudes about acceptable risk for species endangerment are importantly influenced by one's knowledge about the environment and social identity. That result is consistent with notions that risk judgments are a synthesis of facts and values and that knowledge is associated with one's social identity. We explain the implications of these findings for understanding species endangerment across the planet.

Knowledge of human uses of animals is an important, but understudied, aspect of how humans treat animals. We developed a measure of one kind of knowledge of human uses of animalsknowledge of factory farming. Studies 1 (N = 270) and 2 (N = 270) tested an initial battery of objective, true or false statements about factory farming using Item Response Theory. Studies 3 (N = 241) and 4 (N = 278) provided evidence that responses to a 10-item Knowledge of Factory Farming Scale predicted a reduction in consumption of animal products (rs = -.17--.27) and approval of political actions aimed at factory farming (rs = .2 -.24). Path models from Studies 3 and 4 suggested that different kinds of knowledge uniquely predicted different outcomes. The Knowledge of Factory Farming scale was a unique predictor of approval of political actions concerning factory farmed animals but not animal consumption. Knowledge of Animals Used as Food predicting animal consumption but not political actions concerning farmed animals. These results the highlight that different kinds of knowledge can be relevant for different animal related outcomes.

Measuring human consumption of animals and animal products (HCAAP) is challenging but often important for researchers and animal rights advocates. We contribute to measuring HCAAP by conceptualizing that consumption as a trait. In 3 studies, we analyzed responses from traditional Food Frequency Questionnaires and created two measures of HCAAP traits based on 24-hour and 3-month self-reports. Studies 1 (N = 249) and 2 (N = 265) evaluated the item-level properties of 24-hour and 3-month self-reports, eliminating items that were not likely to provide much information about the underlying trait of HCAAP. Study 3 (N = 252) provided evidence that the two measures were predicted by knowledge of animals as food, meat-eating rationalizations, numeracy, sex, and political orientation. These results suggest that the two instruments could be used to measure HCAAP as a trait. We offer suggestions as to when using the two instruments may be beneficial.