The Principle of Animal Welfare in the EU and Its Influence in Japan and the World

  • Yumiko Nakanishi
Part of the Environmental Protection in the European Union book series (ENVPROTEC, volume 5)


Measures on animal welfare have been developed since the 1970s, influenced by the European Conventions of the Council of Europe. While many measures on animal welfare have been adopted, there is no legal basis for animal welfare itself. The principle of animal welfare that considers animal welfare in formulating and implementing the Union’s policy, including common agricultural and internal market policy, is laid down in the declaration annexed to the Maastricht Treaty and now in Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) after the Treaty of Lisbon, which is a provision of the general application. One of the EU measures on animal welfare is related to animal testing. The absolute ban on the marketing of cosmetic products based on animal testing from 11 March 2013 influenced the policies of Japanese companies. Furthermore, legislation regarding trade in seal products has affected third countries and has been contested at the World Trade Organization (WTO) level. Animal welfare is globally considered as public moral issue.


Animal Welfare World Trade Organization Council Directive European Convention Common Agricultural Policy 
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.


  1. Aoki H (2000) Shin Doboutsu Hou. Hitotsubashi Ronso 124:18–33 (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  2. Bolliger G (2000) Europäisches Tierschutzrecht. Stämpfli Verlag, BernGoogle Scholar
  3. Calster G (2000) C J Eur Law 6:115–123Google Scholar
  4. COM (1981) 420 Final, Proposal for a Council Directive laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens kept in battery cagesGoogle Scholar
  5. COM (2006) 13 Final, Communication on a Community Action Plan on the protection and welfare of animals 2006–2010Google Scholar
  6. COM (2008) 469 Final, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning trade in seal productsGoogle Scholar
  7. COM (2012) 6 Final, Communication on the European Union strategy for the protection and welfare of animals 2012–2015Google Scholar
  8. COM (2013) 135 Final, Communication on the animal testing and marketing ban and on the state of play in relation to alternative methods in the field of cosmeticsGoogle Scholar
  9. COM (2015) 45 Final, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1007/2209 on Trade in Seal ProductsGoogle Scholar
  10. Dhont N (2003) Integration of environmental protection into other EC policies. Europa Law Publishing, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  11. Doubutsuaigokanrihoureikenkyukai (Research Association for Animal Welfare) (2001) Kaiseidobutsuaigokannrihou (Amendment of the Act on Animal Welfare and Management of Animals). Seirinshorin, Tokyo (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  12. Fujisawa K (2012) Further amendment is needed. Consumer News, No. 92. Consumer Law News Network, Osaka, pp 355–358 (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  13. Glock J (2003) Das deutche Tierschutzrecht und das Staatsziel ‘Tierschutz’ im Lichte des Völkerrechts und des Europarechts. Nomos, Baden-BadenGoogle Scholar
  14. Nakanishi Y (2009) The principle of environmental integration in the EU law. In: Shoji K (ed) EU environmental law. Keio University Press, Tokyo, pp 115–150 (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  15. Nash R (1989) The rights of nature. The University of Wisconsin Press, WisconsinGoogle Scholar
  16. Okamoto E (2012) Enactment of the draft amendment of act on welfare and management of animals and problems. Consumer News, No. 93. Consumer Law News Network, Osaka, p 325 (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  17. Sakuma T (2005) Regulation of animal testing for medical purpose and rights of animals (in Japanese). In: Motoyama K et al (eds) Peace, life and religion and constitutionalism. Shoyoshobo, Kyoto, pp 177–196Google Scholar
  18. Shaffer G, Pabian D (2014). The WTO EC-Seal products decision (shorter version). Legal Studies Research Paper Series No. 2014-69: 1–9, School of Law, 854 University of CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  19. Singer P (1975) Animal liberation. Harper Collins Publishers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Spaventa E (2002) Common Mark Law Rev 39:1159–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wilkins D (1997) Animal welfare in Europe. Kluwer Law International, The HagueGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of Law, Hitotsubashi UniveristyTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations