Advertisement

Abstract

In Part II, I will focus on the emergence of the science of food animal welfare mandated by the Brambell Commission Report, the various conceptions of animal welfare developed or assumed by (food) animal welfare scientists and their co-philosophers, the accounts they give of their “value assumptions” and the ethical concerns to which they are related, and how these accounts function to justify what I call the on-going appropriation of the concept of animal welfare. Since the body of animal welfare science literature is extensive, I will select several reflective representatives of this movement for this examination of value assumptions. In 1964, Ruth Harrison published her book Animal Machines, which produced such a stir in the UK that the Brambell Committee was formed to report on the state of animal welfare in the use of animals in the UK. The Brambell Committee’s report (1965) said, “Welfare is a wide term that embraces both the physical and mental well-being of the animal. Any attempt to evaluate welfare, therefore, must take into account the scientific evidence available concerning the feelings of animals that can be derived from their structure and functions and also their behavior” (Duncan, 1981). The report was taken as a mandate for animal scientists to undertake a study of animal welfare, and self-styled animal welfare scientists tend to trace their origins to this mandate.

Keywords

Animal Welfare Environmental Ethic Special Supplement Farm Animal Welfare American Veterinary Medical Association 
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. American Veterinary Medical Association (1987), “Panel Report on the Colloquium on Recognition and Alleviation of Animal Pain and Distress.” Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 191: 1186–1191.Google Scholar
  2. Animals, Science, and Ethics Hastings Center Report. Special supplement. Briarcliff Manor, NY: Hastings Center.Google Scholar
  3. Brambell, F. R. (1965), The Report of the Technical Committee to Enquire into the Welfare of Animals Kept Under Intensive Livestock Husbandry Systems. London: H.M.S.O. Command Paper no. 2836.Google Scholar
  4. Broom, D. M. and K. Johnson (1993), Stress and Animal Welfare. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
  5. Cassell, E. J. (1982), “The Nature of Suffering and the Goals of Medicine.” New England Journal of Medicine 306: 639–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988), Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  7. Dawkins, M. S. (1988), “Behavioral Deprivation: A Central Problem in Animal Welfare.” Applied Animal Behaviour Science 20: 209–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dawkins, M. S. (1990), “From an Animal’s Point of View: Motivation, Fitness and Animal Welfare.” Behavorial and Brain Sciences 13: 1–61.Google Scholar
  9. Dawkins, M. S. (1980, 1990), Animal Suffering: The Science of Animal Welfare. New York: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
  10. Duncan, I. J. H. (1981), “Animal Rights—Animal Welfare: A scientific assessment.” Poultry Science 60: 489–499.Google Scholar
  11. 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
  12. Duncan, I. J. H. and M. S. Dawkins (1983), “The Problems of Assessing ‘Well-Being’ and ‘Suffering’ in Farm Animals. In D. Smidt (ed.), Indicators Relevant to Farm Animal Welfare. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, pp. 13–24.Google Scholar
  13. Duncan, I. J. H. and D. Fraser (1997), “Understanding Animal Welfare.” In M. C. Appleby and B. O. Hughes (eds.), Animal Welfare. CABI, Paper, 2000, Ch. 2 pp. 19–31.Google Scholar
  14. Duncan, I. J. H. and J. C. Petherick (1991), “The Implications of Cognitive Processes for Animal Welfare.” Journal of Animal Science 69: 5017–5022.Google Scholar
  15. Fraser, D. (1993), “Assessing Animal Well-Being: Common Sense, Uncommon Science.” In Food Animal Well-Being 1993 — Conference Proceedings and Deliberations, April 13–15 1993, Indianapolis, IN: Purdue University, Office of Agricultural Programs, pp. 37–74.Google Scholar
  16. Harrison, R. (1964), Animal Machines. London: Vincent Stuart.Google Scholar
  17. Harrison, R. (1977), “Animals in Factory Farms.” AWI Report 26(2): 1–4.Google Scholar
  18. Harrison, R. (1993), “Since Animal Machines.” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 6(Special supplement 2): 4–14. The Proceedings of an International Conference on Farm Animal Welfare: Ethical, Technological and Sociopolitical Perspective, held at the Aspen Institute in Queenstown, Maryland in June 1991.Google Scholar
  19. Hurnik, J. F. (1988), “Welfare of Farm Animals.” Applied Animal Behaviour Science 20: 105–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jensen, P. and F. M. Toates (1993), “Who Needs ‘Behavioural Needs’? Motivational aspects of the needs of animals. Applied Animal Behavioural Science 37: 161–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mason, G. J. and M. Mendl (1993), “Why Is There No Simple Way of Measuring Animal Welfare?” Animal Welfare 2: 301–319.Google Scholar
  22. Mench, J. A. (1993), “Assessing Welfare: An Overview.” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 6 (Volume II): 43–53.Google Scholar
  23. Mench, J. A. (1998), “Thirty Years After Brambell: Whither Animal Welfare Science?” Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 1(2): 91–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mendl, M. (1991), “Some Problems with the Concept of a Cut-Off Point for Determining When an Animal’s Welfare Is at Risk.” Applied Animal Behaviour Science 31: 139–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Middleton, C. C. (2002), “The History of the American College of Laboratory Animal Medicine.” In Charles W. McPherson and Steele F. Mattingly (eds.), 50 Years of Laboratory Animal Science. Memphis, TN: American Association for Laboratory Animal Science, Ch. 4.Google Scholar
  26. Moberg, G. (1996), “Suffering from Stress: An Approach for Evaluating the Welfare of an Animal.” Acta Agricolae Scandanavica, Section A Supplementum 27: 46–49.Google Scholar
  27. Morton, D. B., G. M. Burghardt, and J. A. Smith (1990), “Critical Anthropomorphism, Animal Suffering, and the Ecological Context.” In S. Donnelley and K. Nolan (eds.), Animals, Science, and Ethics. Special supplement. Briarcliff Manor, NY: Hastings Center.Google Scholar
  28. Myers, D. G. and E. Diener (1995), “Who Is Happy?” Psychological Science 6: 10–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nicol, C. J. (1994), “Behaviour and Welfare.” In C. M. Waithes and D. R. Charles (eds.), Livestock Housing. Wallingford, UK: CABI, pp. 69–93.Google Scholar
  30. Nordenfelt, L. (2006), Animal and Human Health and Welfare. Oxford: CABI.Google Scholar
  31. Nussbaum, M. C. and A. Sen (eds.) (1993), The Quality of Life. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  32. Rollin, B. E. (1998), The Unheeded Cry. Animal Consciousness, Animal Pain, and Science. Expanded edition. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Rowan, A. N. (1988), “Animal Anxiety and Animal Suffering.” Applied Animal Behavioural Science 20: 135–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rushen, J. and A. M. B. De Passillé (1992), “The Scientific Assessment of the Impact of Housing on Animal Welfare.” Canadian Journal of Animal Science 72: 721–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ryder, R. (1998), The Political Animal. The Conquest of Speciesism. London: McFarland and Co.Google Scholar
  36. Sandøe, P. and H. B. Simonsen (1992), “Assessing Animal Welfare: Where Does Science End and Philosophy Begin?” Animal Welfare I 1: 257–267.Google Scholar
  37. Singer, P. (1975), Animal Liberation. New York: New York Review of Books.Google Scholar
  38. Tannenbaum, J. (1991), “Ethics and Animal Welfare: The Inextricable Connection.” Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 198: 1360–1376.Google Scholar
  39. Welmsefelder, F. (1993), “The Concept of Animal Boredom and Its Relationship to Stereotyped Behaviour.” In A. B. Lawrence and J. Rushen (eds.), Stereotypic Animal Behaviour: Fundamental and Applications to Welfare. Wallingford, UK: CABI.Google Scholar
  40. Wiepkema, P. R., W. G. P. Schouten, and P. Koene (1993), “Biological Aspects of Animal Welfare: New Perspectives.” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 6(Supplement 2): 93–103.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2008

Personalised recommendations