Assessing animal welfare: different philosophies, different scientific approaches

Zoo Biology - Tập 28 Số 6 - Trang 507-518 - 2009
David Fraser1
1Animal Welfare Program, Faculty of Land and Food Systems and W. Maurice Young Centre for Applied Ethics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

Tóm tắt

AbstractAttempts to improve animal welfare have commonly centered around three broad objectives: (1) to ensure good physical health and functioning of animals, (2) to minimize unpleasant “affective states” (pain, fear, etc.) and to allow animals normal pleasures, and (3) to allow animals to develop and live in ways that are natural for the species. Each of these objectives has given rise to scientific approaches for assessing animal welfare. An emphasis on health and functioning has led to assessment methods based on rates of disease, injury, mortality, and reproductive success. An emphasis on affective states has led to assessment methods based on indicators of pain, fear, distress, frustration and similar experiences. An emphasis on natural living has led to research on the natural behavior of animals and on the strength of animals' motivation to perform different elements of their behavior. All three approaches have yielded practical ways to improve animal welfare, and the three objectives are often correlated. However, under captive conditions, where the evolved adaptations of animals may not match the challenges of their current circumstances, the single‐minded pursuit of any one criterion may lead to poor welfare as judged by the others. Furthermore, the three objectives arise from different philosophical views about what constitutes a good life—an area of disagreement that is deeply embedded in Western culture and that is not resolved by scientific research. If efforts to improve animal welfare are to achieve widespread acceptance, they need to strike a balance among the different animal welfare objectives. Zoo Biol 28:507–518, 2009. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.3382/ps.0640238

Anonymous, 1989, How Astrid Lindgren achieved enactment of the 1988 law protecting farm animals in Sweden

10.1016/S0168-1591(01)00171-X

10.1080/0007166022000004390

Brambell FWR, 1965, Report of the technical committee to enquire into the welfare of animals kept under intensive livestock husbandry systems

10.1016/S0065-3454(08)60369-1

Dahrendorf R, 1987, Max Weber and his contemporaries, 574

10.1086/420307

10.1016/0031-9384(93)90326-B

10.1080/00071668608416861

Edwards SA, 1995, Animal behavior and the design of livestock and poultry systems, 115

Ekesbo I, 1966, Disease incidence in tied and loose housed dairy cattle and causes, Acta Agric Scand, 15, 1

10.1186/1751-0147-50-S1-S1

Fraser D, 1998, Pleasures, pains and animal welfare: toward a natural history of affect, Anim Welf, 7, 383, 10.1017/S0962728600020935

10.1038/scientificamerican1162-136

Harrison R, 1964, Animal machines

10.1079/WPS19860008

10.1079/WPS19960013

10.2460/javma.2005.226.225

Markowitz H, 1982, Behavioral enrichment in the zoo

10.1002/zoo.1430100202

Newman MA, 1993, The history of the Vancouver Aquarium

10.1080/713654991

10.1080/00480169.1996.35924

Rollin BE, 1993, Animal welfare, science, and value, J Agric Environ Ethics, 6, 44

Sainsbury D, 1986, Farm animal welfare: cattle, pigs and poultry

10.1007/978-94-009-2711-7

Shepherdson DJ, 1998, Second nature: environmental enrichment for captive animals

Singer P, 1990, Animal liberation

Stolba A, 1984, The identification of behavioural key features and their incorporation into a housing design for pigs, Ann Rech Vet, 15, 287

10.1093/ps/77.12.1820

10.1136/vr.91.18.426

UEP, 2008, United egg producers animal husbandry guidelines for U.S. egg laying flocks

10.1016/0168-1591(95)00611-U

10.1016/S0168-1591(96)01173-2

10.1002/zoo.10005

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Zoo Biology

Tập 28 Số 6

507-518

Thông tin tác giả