Advertisement

Animal Welfare pp 107-117 | Cite as

Appleby-Sandøe and the Human Welfare Model

Abstract

In a paper published in 2002, Appleby and Sandøe set out some of the background assumptions of the philosophers who have contributed to the discussion of animal welfare, such as Singer (1975), Rollin (1981), Regan (1983), Midgley (1983), Frey (1980), Leahy (1991), and Carruthers (1992), in order to help clarify the thinking of those who try to assess animal welfare. Appleby and Sandøe say that while philosophy does not provide a definite answer to the question of what animal welfare is, it does help clarify thinking and this clarification is important for animal welfare research because research can be improved by making hidden assumptions explicit and by reflecting on those assumptions. To be able to assess animal welfare, then, scientists must, at least implicitly, take a definition of animal welfare as their starting point, so in order to make scientists as well-informed as possible in the definition they choose, the authors will explain the strengths and weakness of the different approaches to defining well-being for humans, and then apply these to definitions of animal welfare that they most correspond to.

Keywords

Animal Welfare Moral Status Nonhuman Animal Moral Progress Fairness Issue 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Appleby, M. C. (1999), What Should We Do About Animal Welfare? Oxford: Blackwell Science.Google Scholar
  2. Appleby, M. C. and P. Sandøe (2002), “Philosophical Debate on the Nature of Well-Being: Implications for Animal Welfare.” Animal Welfare 11(2002): 283–294.Google Scholar
  3. Appleby, M. C., J. A. Mench, and B. O. Hughes (eds.) (2004), Poultry Behaviour and Welfare. Wallingford: CABI.Google Scholar
  4. Broom, D. M. (1996), “Animal Welfare Defined in Terms of Attempts to Cope with the Environment.” Acta Agricolae Scandnavica, Section A Animal Science Supplement 27(1996): 22–28.Google Scholar
  5. Donovan, J., and C. J. Adams (eds.) (1996), Beyond Animal Rights A Feminist Caring Ethnic for the Treatment of Animals. New York: Continum.Google Scholar
  6. Carruthers, P. (1992), The Animals Issue: Moral Theory in Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Coppinger, R. P. and C. K. Smith (1983), “The Domestication of Evolution.” Environmental Conservation 10: 283–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. DeGrazia, D. (1996), Taking Animals Seriously: Mental Life and Moral Status. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Duncan, I. J. H. (1996), “Animal Welfare Defined in Terms of Feelings.” Acta Agricolae Scandanavica, Section A Animal Science Supplementum 27: 29–35.Google Scholar
  10. Duncan, I. J. H. and D. Fraser (1997), “Understanding Animal Welfare.” In M. C. Appleby and B. O. Hughes (eds.), Animal Welfare. Wallingford: CABI, Ch. 2, pp. 19–31.Google Scholar
  11. Ferré, F. (2001), Living and Value: Toward a Constructive Postmodern Ethics. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  12. Ferré, F. (2004), “Moderation, Morals, and Meat.” In S. F. Sapontzis (ed.), Food for Thought. The Debate over Eating Meat. Amherst, NY: Prometheus, pp. 315–326.Google Scholar
  13. Fraser, D., D. M. Weary, E. A. Pajor, and B. N. Milligan (1997), “A Scientific Conception of Animal Welfare That Reflects Ethical Concerns.” Animal Welfare 6(1997): 187–205.Google Scholar
  14. Frey, R. G. (1980), Interests and Rights. The Case Against Animals. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  15. Griffin, J. (1986), Well-Being: Its Meaning, Measurement and Moral Importance. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  16. Hurka, T. (1993), Perfectionism. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Jensen, K. K. and P. Sandøe (1997), “Animal Welfare: Relative or Absolute?” Applied Animal Behavioural Science 54: 33–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kagan, S. (1992), “The Limits of Well-Being.” In E. F. Paul, F. D. Miller, and J. Paul (eds.), The Good Life and the Human Good. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 169–189.Google Scholar
  19. Kheel, M. (2004), “Vegetarianism and Ecofeminism: Toppling Patriarchy with a Fork.” In S. F. Sapontzis (ed.), Food for Thought. The Debate over Eating Meat. Amherst, NY: Prometheus, pp. 327–343.Google Scholar
  20. Leahy, M. P. T. (1991), Against Liberation: Putting Animals in Perspective. New York: Routledge/Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
  21. Matheny, G. and K. M. A. Chan (2005), “Human Diets and Animal Welfare: The Illogic of the Larder.” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18(6): 579–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Midgley, M. (1983), Animals and Why They Matter. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
  23. Midgley, M. (1986), “Letter to the Editors.” Between the Species 2: 195–196.Google Scholar
  24. Nordenfelt, L. (2006), Animal and Human Health and Welfare. A Comparative Philosophical Analysis. Oxford: CABI.Google Scholar
  25. Nussbaum, M. C. (2004), “Beyond ‘Compassion and Humanity’: Justice for Nonhuman Animals.” In C. R. Sunstein and M. C. Nussbaum (eds.), Animal Rights. Current Debates and New Directions. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 299–320.Google Scholar
  26. Parfit, D. (1984) (1986), Reasons and Persons. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  27. Regan, T. (1983), The Case for Animal Rights. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  28. Reiss, M. J. and R. Straughan (1996), Improving Nature? The Science and Ethics of Genetic Engineering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Rollin, B. E. (1981), Animal Rights and Human Morality. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus.Google Scholar
  30. Sandøe, P. (1999). “Quality of Life: Three Competing Views.” Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2: 11–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sandø, P., R. Crisp, and N. Holtung (1997), “Ethics.” In M. C. Appleby and B. O. Hughes, Animal Welfare. Wallingford: CABI, Ch. 1 pp. 3–17.Google Scholar
  32. Sandøe, P., S. B. Christiansen, and M. C. Appleby (2003), “Farm Animal Welfare: The Interaction of Ethical Questions and Animal Welfare Science.” Animal Welfare 12: 469–478.Google Scholar
  33. Sapontzis, S. F. (1987). Morals, Reason, and Animals. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Sapontzis, S. F. (1988), “Animal Liberation and Vegetarianism.” Journal of Agricultural Ethics I(2): 139–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Singer, P. (1975), Animal Liberation. New York: New York Review of Books.Google Scholar
  36. Sumner, L. W. (1992), “Two Theories of the Good.” In E. F. Paul, F. D. Miller, and J. Paul (eds.), The Good Life and the Human Good. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 169–189.Google Scholar
  37. Sumner, L. W. (1996). Welfare, Happiness, and Ethics. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  38. Sunstein, C. R. and M. C. Nussbaum (1984), Animal Rights. Current Debates and New Directions. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

Personalised recommendations