Reimagining Human Responsibility Towards Animals for Disaster Management in the Anthropocene

Abstract

Animals, like human beings, are prone to suffering harms, such as disease, injury and death, as a result of anthropogenic and natural disasters. Animals are disproportionately prone to risk and adversely affected by disasters, and thus require humane and respectful care when disasters strike, due to socially situated vulnerabilities based on how human communities assess and value their moral standing and function. The inability to integrate animals into disaster risk and management practices and processes can sometimes be associated with a lack of understanding about what animal ethics and animal health and welfare require when designing disaster management programs. This chapter seeks to reimagine human responsibility towards animals for disaster management. The pervasiveness of disasters and their impacts on animals, human-animal and animal-environment relationships underscore the importance of effective animal disaster management supported by sound ethical decision-making processes. To this end, we delineate six ethically responsible animal caretaking aims for consideration when developing disaster management plans and policies. These aims, which address central vulnerabilities experienced by domesticated animals during disasters, are meant to be action-guiding within the disaster management context. They include: (1) Save lives and mitigate harm; (2) Protect animal welfare and respect animals’ experiences; (3) Observe, recognize and promote distributive justice; (4) Advance public involvement; (5) Empower caregivers, guardians, owners and community members; (6) Bolster public health and veterinary community professionalism, including engagement in multidisciplinary teams and applied scientific developments. To bring about these aims, we offer a set of practical and straightforward action steps for animal caregivers and disaster management teams to ensure that animals’ interests are systematically promoted in disaster management. They include: (1) Respect and humane treatment; (2) Collaboration and effective disaster communication; (3) Strengthening systems of information sharing, surveillance, scientific research, management and training; (4) Community outreach and proactive contact; (5) Cultural sensitivity and attitudes check, and (6) Reflection, review and reform.

Better CSR? return to neighborliness

“…Indeed, to the extent that CSR can be deemed successful, it is so different across different contexts. 84 Equally, while traditionally salient stakeholders are easier to define and engage, including local NGOs, unpredictable, fluid, and possibly contradictory, neighbors will take different forms, 85 including nonhuman ones, 86 and so demand more responsive, unplanned, and open engagements. This implies greater inclusion of concerns, possibly with actors less familiar to leaders if not to their staff.…”

Evaluation of animal safe places for emergency evacuation in the Hunter Region of New South Wales, Australia

“…In times of disasters, animals, encompassing domesticated animals and livestock, often face heightened susceptibility owing to their restricted ability to identify safe havens or protect themselves from danger. Safeguarding animal welfare can result in advantageous consequences for human well-being, safety and general welfare (Vieira and Anthony, 2021). This is because emergency responders can evacuate individuals with assurance that their animals are being appropriately attended to.…”

“…One significant concern involves logistical obstacles that may emerge due to limited resources, such as time constraints, that could hinder the coordination endeavours among stakeholders tasked with overseeing impacted animals. According to Vieira and Anthony (2021), stakeholders involved in ensuring the welfare of animals during different stages of operational execution may comprise animal owners, caregivers, guardians and governmental organisations. The lack of adequate knowledge among the public regarding the support services that are available can act as a hindrance to the process of evacuation (Royal Commission Report, 2020).…”