Healthy, Happy and Humane: Evidence in Farm Animal Welfare Policy

Buller, Henry

doi:10.1111/soru.12011

Cited by 39 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The concept of animal welfare, political debates about animal welfare, and the scientific discipline of animal welfare have all emerged together (Hagen, Van den Bos et al 2011, Bock andBuller 2013). Animal welfare is a public issue in ways that extend beyond market mechanisms.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are different ethical valences in the types of evaluation permitted to citizens and consumers in that the roles of evidence and values in determining animal welfare standards, and the responsibilities of experts and ordinary people, varies between them (Bock and Buller 2013). At one extreme the role of experts in the discipline of AWS is to produce objective evidence that informs the determination of appropriate animal use through political mechanisms and regulatory channels (which are responsive to public opinion and public values).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Citizens, Consumers and Animals: What Role do Experts Assign to Public Values in Establishing Animal Welfare Standards?

Degeling¹,

Johnson²

2015

J Agric Environ Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The public can influence animal welfare law and regulation. However what constitutes 'the public' is not a straightforward matter. A variety of different publics have an interest in animal use and this has implications for the governance of animal welfare. This article presents an ethnographic content analysis of how the concept of a public is mobilized in animal welfare journals from 2003 to 2012. The study was undertaken to explore how experts in the discipline define and regard the role of the public in determining animal welfare standards. Analysis indicates that experts in animal welfare constitute different types of citizen and consumer publics around specific types of animal use, framed by different theories of value. These results suggest a need for greater clarity about the roles and responsibilities of experts and publics in animal welfare reform processes. Clearly citizens and consumers can both contribute to promoting higher welfare standards, but an over-reliance on market mechanisms and consumer behaviour to assign value is beset by moral hazards, foremost being the risk of disarticulating the concept of animal welfare from the public good. INTRODUCTIONUnprecedented public interest in animal welfare over the last decade has prompted governments in many Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD] countries to review their animal welfare standards and guidelines (Webster 2008, Broom 2011. Because most members of the OECD are also liberal democratic states, the public is thought to have a legitimate role in determining the outcome of these processes.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizens, Consumers and Animals: What Role do Experts Assign to Public Values in Establishing Animal Welfare Standards?

Degeling¹,

Johnson²

2015

J Agric Environ Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, in industrial agriculture, animals have been perfectly deindividualized into a homogenous multitude, a key rhetorical device to allow for their daily massacre to go unnoticed. To contrast this, animal welfare movements have developed an increasingly individualistic notion of animal suffering (Bock & Buller, 2013;Buller, 2013). The welfare movement strategy seeks to foster animal protection vis-à-vis a law which, given its congenital inability in coping with animal crowds (Holmberg, 2015), appears able to provide only statistical and average limits with "acceptable" levels (of violence, pain, etc.)…”

Section: Animal Governance Domestication and Classificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban Animals—Domestic, Stray, and Wild: Notes from a Bear Repopulation Project in the Alps

Brighenti

Pavoni

2018

Soc. Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This piece explores “domesticity” as a social territory defined by its relationship with the conceptual and ecological space of “the wild,” and asks whether these spaces stand in opposition to each other or more subtle relations of co-implication are at play. As we look into the domestic and the wild, a conceptual map of notions emerges, including the public, the common, the civilized, and the barbarian. The paper suggests the domestic and the wild constitute two semiotic-ecological domains constantly stretching into each other without any stable or even clear boundary line, and it elaborates on a series of corollaries for studying non-human animals in urban contexts. As an illustrative case study, we follow the story of Daniza, a wild brown bear introduced in the Brenta Natural Park on the Italian Alps in the 2000s. Declared a “dangerous animal,” Daniza was accidentally, and controversially, killed by the public authorities in 2014.

show abstract

“…Research like Eric Lambin's or Jon Barnett's represents only part of their collective activity. Consider the contributions made by political ecologists (e.g., Ribot, ), animal geographers (e.g., Gibbs et al ., ), analysts of agro‐food systems (e.g., Bock and Buller, ), and many others besides. Much of their activity does not instantiate the narrative favoured by Harden and previous disciplinary notables.…”

Section: A Troubling Narrative‐practice Loopmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geography and Global Change Science: Relationships Necessary, Absent, and Possible

Castree

2015

Geographical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Initiated by geoscientists, the growing debate about the Anthropocene, 'planetary boundaries' and global 'tipping points' is a significant opportunity for geographers to reconfigure two things: one is the internal relationships among their discipline's many and varied perspectives (topical, philosophical, and methodological) on the real; the other the discipline's actual and perceived contributions to important issues in the wider society. Yet, without concerted effort and struggle, the opportunity is likely to be used in a 'safe' and rather predictable way by only a sub-set of human-environment geographers. The socio-environmental challenges of a post-Holocene world invite old narratives about Geography's holistic intellectual contributions to be reprised in the present. These narratives speak well to many geoscientists, social scientists, and decision-makers outside Geography. However, they risk perpetuating an emaciated conception of reality wherein Earth systems and social systems are seen as knowable and manageable if the 'right' ensemble of expertise is achieved. I argue that we need to get out from under the shadow of these long-standing narratives. Using suggestive examples, I make the case for forms of inquiry across the human-physical 'divide' that eschew ontological monism and that serve to reveal the many legitimate cognitive, moral, and aesthetic framings of Earth present and future. Geography is unusual in that the potential for these forms of inquiry to become normalised is high compared with other subjects. This potential will only be taken advantage of if certain humanenvironment geographers unaccustomed to engaging the world of geoscience and environmental policy change their modus operandi.

show abstract

Healthy, Happy and Humane: Evidence in Farm Animal Welfare Policy

Cited by 39 publications

References 71 publications

Citizens, Consumers and Animals: What Role do Experts Assign to Public Values in Establishing Animal Welfare Standards?

Citizens, Consumers and Animals: What Role do Experts Assign to Public Values in Establishing Animal Welfare Standards?

Urban Animals—Domestic, Stray, and Wild: Notes from a Bear Repopulation Project in the Alps

Geography and Global Change Science: Relationships Necessary, Absent, and Possible

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About