Abstract
This book explores the character of animal welfare policymaking in Britain and the United States. Comparative public policy has been defined as the study of ‘how, why, and to what extent different governments pursue particular courses of action or inactron’.l In the same tradition, this study seeks to ask who makes decisions impinging on the well-being of animals, who attempts to influence these decisions, why certain decisions are taken rather than others, how legitimate these decisions are and whether there has been a historical shift in the pattern of decision-making.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
A. Heidenheimer, H. Heclo and C. Teich Adams, Comparative Public Policy, 3rd edn (New York: St Martin’s Press, 1990) p. 3.
See, to name but a few, P. Singer, Animal Liberation, 2nd edn (London: Cape, 1990);
T. Regan, The Can for Animal Rights (London: Routledge, 1984);
B. Rollin, Animal Rights and Human Morality (New York: Prometheus, 1981);
R. Ryder, Victims of Science: The Use of Animals in Research (London: Davis-Poynter, 1975).
R. Garner, Animals, Politics and Morality (Manchester University Press, 1993).
K. Shapiro, ‘Editorial’, Society & Animals, 3 (1995) p. 2.
See C. Hollands, Compassion is the Bugler (Edinburgh: McDonald, 1980);
R Ryder, Animal Revolution: Changing Attitudes Towards Speciesism (Oxford: Blackwell, 1989);
I. Newkirk, Free the Animals (Chicago: Noble Press, 1992).
See D. Henshaw, Animal Warfare: The Story of the Animal Liberation Front (London: Fontana, 1989).
J. Berry, Lobbying for the People (Princeton University Press, 1977) pp. 110–40.
J. Jaser and D. Nelkin, The Animal Rights Crusade (New York: Free Press, 1992);
S. Sperling, Animal Liberators: Research and Morality (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988);
L. Finsen and S. Finsen, The Animal Rights Movement in America: From Compassion to Respect (New York: Twayne, 1994);
G. Francione, Animals, Property and the Law (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1995); For Britain see Garner, Animals, Politics and Morality;
R. Thomas, The Politics of Hunting (Aldershot: Gower, 1983)
K. Shapiro, ‘The Caring Sleuth: Portrait of an Animal Rights Activist’, Society and Animals, 2 (1994) pp. 145–65;
H. Herzog, ‘“The Movement is My Life”: The Psychology of Animal Rights Activism’, Journal of Social Issues, 49 (1993) pp. 103–19;
J. Jasper and J. Poulson, ‘Fighting Back: Vulnerabilities, Blunders and Countermobilization by the Targets in Three Animal Rights Campaigns’, Sociological Forum, 8 (1993) pp. 639–57.
See P. Bachrach and M. Baratz, ‘The Two Faces of Power’, American Political Science Review, 56 (1962) pp. 947–52.
For a survey see P. Dunleavy and B. O’Leary, Theories of the State (London: Macmillan, 1987).
See in particular R. Dahl, Who Governs? (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1961);
R. Dahl, A Preface to Democratic Theory (University of Chicago Press, 1956).
For useful summaries see A. McFarland, ‘Interest Groups and Theories of Power in America’, British Journal of Political Science, 17 (1987) pp. 136–9;
W. Gamson, The Strategy of Social Protest (Illinois: Dorsey Press, 1975) pp. 5–7;
G. Jordon and J. Richardson, Government and Pressure Groups in Britain (Oxford University Press, 1987) pp. 43–61.
For a general account of the debate see J. Berry, The Interest Group Society, 2nd edn (London: HarperCollins, 1989) pp. 197–99.
The major texts seeking to challenge pluralism are: C. Wright Mills, The Power Elite (New York: Galaxy, 1959);
N. Polsby, Community Power and Political Theory (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963);
Bachrach and Baratz, ‘Two Faces of Power’; T. Lowi, The End of Liberalism, 2nd edn (New York: Norton, 1979).
S. Lukes, Power: A Radical View (London: Macmillan, 1974).
W. Grant, Pressure Groups, Politics and Democracy in Britain, 2nd edn (Hemel Hempstead: Harvester-Wheatsheaf, 1995) p. 34.
For the US origins of policy network theory see G. Jordan, Sub-Governments, Policy Communities and Networks: Refilling the Old Bottles?’, Journal of Theoretical Politics, 2 (1990) pp. 319–24.
See D. Marsh and. R. Rhodes (eds) Policy Networks in British Politics (Oxford University Press, 1992).
G. Jordan and J. Richardson, ‘Policy Communities: The British and European Policy Style’, Policy Studies Journal, 11 (1983) p. 607.
See R. Rhodes and D. Marsh, ‘The Concept of Policy Networks in British Political Science: Its Development and Utility’, Talking Politics, 8 (1996) pp. 210–22.
F. Loew, ‘Turning Plowshares into Volvos: Changing American Attitudes Toward Livestock’, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 1 (1993) 105–6.
See, in particular, H. Helco, ‘Issue Networks and the Executive Establishment’, in A. King (ed.) The New American Political System (Washington DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1978) and Berry, The Interest Group Society p. 179.
G. Francione, Animals, Property and the Law and Rain Without Thunder: The Ideology of the Animal Rights Movement (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1996).
W. Browne, Private Interests, Public Policy and American Agriculture (Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1988) pp. 192–3.
H. Moyer and T. Josling, Agricultural Policy Reform: Politics and Process in the EC and the USA (Hemel Hempstead: Harvester-Wheatsheaf, 1990) p. 1.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1998 Robert Garner
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Garner, R. (1998). Introduction. In: Political Animals. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26438-4_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-26438-4_1
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-73000-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-26438-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)