Bioethics Symposium: The ethical food movement: What does it mean for the role of science and scientists in current debates about animal agriculture?

Contemporary animal agriculture is increasingly criticized on ethical grounds. Consequently, current policy and legislative discussions have become highly controversial as decision makers attempt to reconcile concerns about the impacts of animal production on animal welfare, the environment, and on the efficacy of antibiotics required to ensure human health with demands for abundant, affordable, safe food. Clearly, the broad implications for US animal agriculture of what appears to be a burgeoning movement relative to ethical food production must be understood by animal agriculture stakeholders. The potential effects of such developments on animal agricultural practices, corporate marketing strategies, and public perceptions of the ethics of animal production must also be clarified. To that end, it is essential to acknowledge that people's beliefs about which food production practices are appropriate are tied to diverse, latent value systems. Thus, relying solely on scientific information as a means to resolve current debates about animal agriculture is unlikely to be effective. The problem is compounded when scientific information is used inappropriately or strategically to advance a political agenda. Examples of the interface between science and ethics in regards to addressing currently contentious aspects of food animal production (animal welfare, antimicrobial use, and impacts of animal production practices on the environment) are reviewed. The roles of scientists and science in public debates about animal agricultural practices are also examined. It is suggested that scientists have a duty to contribute to the development of sound policy by providing clear and objectively presented information, by clarifying misinterpretations of science, and by recognizing the differences between presenting data vs. promoting their own value judgments in regard to how and which data should be used to establish policy. Finally, the role of the media in shaping public opinions on key issues pertaining to animal agriculture is also discussed.     

From a philosopher's perspective, how should animal scientists meet the challenge of contentious issues?

This article reviews how professional ethics can be useful in helping animal scientists meet new responsibilities. The transition to a postindustrial period in animal production signals a shift in the nature of contentious issues that animal producers face. Whereas farm income was once the most controversial issue in animal production, producers and animal scientists now face complex risk issues that have overlapping constituencies. Animal scientists need to develop a professional ethic that will stress open and active debate on these issues. Discussion of these issues must take place in the animal science classroom. The new professional ethic should be based on core values required for scientific research. However, departments and professional societies must develop institutions that will permit the values and methods of rationality and truth seeking to be applied in areas where measurement and experimental method are unlikely to resolve disputes, (i.e., to controversial issues that require public discussion and debate). Several specific proposals for such institution building are discussed.     

American veterinarians' animal welfare limitations

American society is becoming increasingly interested in issues of animal welfare, and the public generally recognizes the need for guidance from experts in the field. Assessing an animal's welfare status requires a determination of the state of both its physical and its psychological well-being. American veterinarians are well trained to assess the physical state of most animals, but they do not receive equivalent training in assessing an animal's psychological state. Therefore, the recognized expertise of the American veterinary profession currently lies only in answering physical welfare questions, not in assessing the psychological (or societal) aspects of animal welfare issues. If American veterinarians wish to be seen as animal welfare experts, then it is critical for the profession to educate its members in assessing the psychological state of animals. Also, if the American Veterinary Medical Association wishes to be considered a leader in the field of animal welfare, it must partner with organizations with expertise in pertinent areas outside of the veterinary medical field to develop appropriate guidelines for American society, including the development of a widely accepted system for defining and determining overall animal welfare. If American veterinarians actively work to improve our strengths and combine them with those of experts in other fields, we can overcome our limitations as animal welfare experts and achieve wider acceptance as an important force for improving animal welfare.     

Board-invited review: the ethical and behavioral bases for farm animal welfare legislation

Concerns about farm animal welfare vary among individuals and societies. As people increasingly consider the values underlying current farm animal production methods, farm animal welfare policy debates have escalated. Recent food animal protection policies enacted in the European Union have fueled highly contentious discussions about the need for similar legislative activity in the United States. Policymakers and scientists in the United States are apprehensive about the scientific assessment, validation, and monitoring of animal welfare, as well as the unforeseen consequences of moving too hastily toward legislating farm animal welfare. The potential impact of such legislation on producers, food prices, animals, and concerned citizens must also be considered. Balancing the interests of all stakeholders has therefore presented a considerable challenge that has stymied US policymaking. In this review, we examine the roles of ethics and science in policy decisions, discuss how scientific knowledge relative to animal behavior has been incorporated into animal welfare policy, and identify opportunities for additional refinement of animal welfare science that may facilitate ethical and policy decisions about animal care.     

The "new perception" of animal agriculture: legless cows, featherless chickens, and a need for genuine analysis

A growing popular literature has created a "New Perception" of animal agriculture by depicting commercial animal production as 1) detrimental to animal welfare, 2) controlled by corporate interests, 3) motivated by profit rather than by traditional animal care values, 4) causing increased world hunger, 5) producing unhealthy food, and 6) harming the environment. Agricultural organizations have often responded with public relations material promoting a very positive image of animal agriculture and denying all six of the critics' claims. The public, faced with these two highly simplistic and contradictory images, needs knowledgeable research and analysis to serve as a basis for public policy and individual choice. Scientists and ethicists could provide such analysis. In some cases, however, scientists and ethicists have themselves produced misleading, polarized, or simplistic accounts of animal agriculture. The problems in such accounts include the repetition of unreliable information from advocacy sources, use of unwarranted generalizations, simplistic analysis of complex issues, and glossing over the ethical problems. The New Perception debate raises important and complex ethical issues; in order to provide useful guidance, both scientists and ethicists must consider these issues as research problems that are worthy of genuine investigation and analysis.     

Postmodernism for animal scientists

Many scientists regard the term "postmodernism" as controversial. Because postmodern theorists question whether science can be objective, some scientists view postmodernism as anti-scientific. In this paper, we argue that traditional accounts of science developed during the modern era (16th, 17th, and 18th centuries) are still influential in animal science, but are no longer plausible. In particular, the view that science automatically leads to human betterment seems to be disingenuous. A postmodern view that portrays science as a political activity seems more plausible, and offers a means to better understand contentious policy issues that involve science. Although most animal scientists accept the view that theory selection, experimental designs, and technology development require value-laden judgments, most fail to recognize that such values may be politically motivated and embrace prevailing political structures. Postmodernists such as Michel Foucault argue that through the generation of knowledge, scientific disciplines create a discourse that serves to maintain a particular social structure that has political implications. Viewed in this way, it becomes clear how various interest groups can be critical of certain scientific programs. For example, groups that oppose research dealing with cloning, genetically modified organisms, and intensive livestock production may not be as much opposed to science as they are to the political interests served by this science. In other words, such groups view these research agendas as promoting policies that place them at risk. Such a postmodern account of science, may help animal scientists better understand the nature of contentious issues, and provide a basis for reforming the animal science discipline in ways that make it more responsive to the diverse interests of a pluralistic society.     

The process of building a new governmental authority based on public demands for improved animal welfare

Sweden has a long history of detailed and progressive legislation related to animal welfare for laboratory, farm and companion animals. Previously, these issues have been the responsibility of the Swedish Board of Agriculture (SBA). As a growing proportion of the public opinion and the political establishment felt that the animal welfare related issues were not given proper attention at the SBA, a political decision was recently made to separate animal housing, management and welfare from the SBA and create an independent Animal Welfare Agency. This Agency was formally launched on January 1st 2004. The government has commissioned the Agency to improve animal welfare by evaluating, enforcing and developing legislation. The agency should consider scientific evidence when writing new legislation. Also, the Agency incorporates an external Animal Welfare Council, which, among other things, discusses ethical aspects in relation to existing or proposed legislature. The new Agency must deal with a diversity of public expectations. Animal rights groups have high expectations regarding new and stricter legislation, for example related to fur animals, while some farmers fear that production aspects may be completely lost in discussions about improving welfare standards for farm animals.     

The importance of animal cognition in agricultural animal production systems: an overview.

To describe and then fulfill agricultural animals' needs, we must learn more about their fundamental psychological and behavioral processes. How does this animal feel? Is that animal suffering? Will we ever be able to know these things? Scientists specializing in animal cognition say that there are numerous problems but that they can be overcome. Recognition by scientists of the notion of animal awareness has been increasing in recent years, because of the work of Griffin and others. Feeling, thinking, remembering, and imagining are cognitive processes that are factors in the economic and humane production of agricultural animals. It has been observed that the animal welfare debate depends on two controversial questions: Do animals have subjective feelings? If they do, can we find indicators that reveal them? Here, indirect behavioral analysis approaches must be taken. Moreover, the linear additivity of several stressor effects on a variety of animal traits suggests that some single phenomenon is acting as a "clearinghouse" for many or all of the stresses acting on an animal at any given time, and this phenomenon might be psychological stress. Specific situations animals may encounter in agricultural production settings are discussed with respect to the animals' subjective feelings.     

Teaching animal welfare in the land grant universities

Colleges and universities have an obligation to teach the basis of animal husbandry and welfare and must prepare students so that they can respond effectively to challenges by proponents of the animal welfare and animal rights movements. Veterinary curricula must now contain formal instruction in professional ethics and humane stewardship of animals for accreditation by the American Veterinary Medical Association. It is helpful if students have an understanding of farm animal behavior, stress physiology and methods of assessing welfare prior to learning about the animal welfare/rights movement's philosophies and issues. A review of early judicial practices, "classical" Judeo-Christian philosophy, the philosophy of Rene Descartes, Jeremy Bentham, Albert Schweitzer, and current philosophers and the entertainment media places the movements in perspective. Students should be familiar with such concepts as the mind-body controversy, equality of suffering, self-awareness or intelligence, and speciesism. After acquiring an appreciation of the basics, a knowledge of the issues facing animal agriculture and the arguments for and against each issue are necessary. Graduates of colleges of agriculture need to realize the potential effects the movements can have and take the initiative to improve the image of animal agriculture.     

Critical perspectives of animal agriculture: introduction

The American Society of Animal Science has recently focused its attention on a variety of contentious issues in animal agriculture. This paper deals with critique, a philosophical approach to analyzing and understanding issues. This method has been employed by various contemporary philosophers. For example, feminist theorists have used this approach to critically analyze sexual harassment. Critique involves a critical analysis of the discourse (ideas or language) and practices that define the social reality in which we live. How we think about the world and how we behave in it determines how we humans interact with each other as well as with the rest of nature. This social structure is associated with power structures that benefit some individuals and harm others. In this paper, I demonstrate how critique can be used to better understand the social reality of animal agriculture. By analyzing certain popular texts in this field, I show that a "mechanical view of nature" is dominant in animal agriculture and argue that such a view contributes to a social reality that can be harmful to some humans and other animals. I conclude that various contentious issues can be better addressed when we engage in a critical analysis of this conceptual framework and base our analysis on the experiences of many different people, including those who have been harmed by our current system of animal agriculture.     

Ethics: The new challenge for animal agriculture

This paper introduces this volume dedicated to ethics in animal agriculture, in which moral responsibility of the actors of the animal production chain and relations between science, production and the society are analysed. Ethical concepts and their evolution through the ages, and ethical issues arising across different modes of production are presented. The diversity of viewpoints and interests of the stakeholders (farmers, technicians, scientists, consumers and citizens), relative to their values, cultures, and production conditions, is emphasized. The processes by which norms can be built while taking into account this diversity and societal objectives are illustrated at the levels of the profession, the country, Europe or the world. Ethics in animal production is a condition of the acceptability of the products, but also of the animal production sector as a whole.     

我国养猪业的福利问题及对策

动物福利已越来越受到人类社会的关注。本文介绍了动物福利的概念,我国养猪业中动物福利存在的问题,提出了改善养猪业动物福利的有关措施。     

Animal welfare: at the interface between science and society

The general concept of animal welfare embraces a continuum between negative/bad welfare and positive/good welfare. Early approaches to defining animal welfare were mainly based on the exclusion of negative states, neglecting the fact that during evolution animals optimised their ability to interact with and adapt to their environment(s). An animal's welfare status might best be represented by the adaptive value of the individual's interaction with a given environmental setting but this dynamic welfare concept has significant implications for practical welfare assessments. Animal welfare issues cannot simply be addressed by means of objective biological measurements of an animal's welfare status under certain circumstances. In practice, interpretation of welfare status and its translation into the active management of perceived welfare issues are both strongly influenced by context and, especially, by cultural and societal values. In assessing whether or not a given welfare status is morally acceptable, animal welfare scientists must be aware that scientifically based, operational definitions of animal welfare will necessarily be influenced strongly by a given society's moral understanding.     

Developing a systematic strategy incorporating ethical , animal welfare and practice principles to guide the genetic improvement of dairy cattle

People have complex and diverse relationships and interactions with, and expectations of, animals; relationships which are very important. In making sense of this complexity, we draw on our values. The objective of this study was to reflect upon, develop and articulate key values guiding the genetic improvement of dairy cattle. Animal husbandry is guided by the philosophy that while animals serve our needs, we must ensure that their needs are met, and any compromises to those needs justified and minimised. In applying modern technology to the genetic improvement of animals, this philosophy should be enacted through consideration of all the broader goals of agriculture, and the ecology and biology of the farming system. It should also be informed by the differing perspectives of interested parties, including stock handlers, veterinarians, animal welfare groups, consumers, and the public. Monitoring the consequences of technology applications, managing and avoiding any harms, and considering the future of animals and ourselves, should also be part of decision making in this area. Transparent consideration of these principles will help to ensure that any compromises to animal welfare resulting from trait selection are both reasonable and necessary, and that any harms are minimised, thereby helping to safeguard continuation of the important contribution that animal agriculture, and in particular the dairy sector, makes to society.     

Educational methodology in dealing with animal rights and welfare in public service

Animal rights and animal welfare have biological, economic, social, philosophical, emotional, political, legal and policy dimensions. Hundred of organizations are active in some aspect of these issues. Viewpoints range in a continuum from animal rights advocates to livestock producers. One long-range goal is to increase understandings of both the benefits and the costs of animal rights and animal welfare for individuals and society. In the short-range, solutions and (or) alternatives for crisis situations are needed. Key aspects for using education as a means to solve these problems are 1) characterization of the issue(s), 2) identification of the audience(s), 3) selection of communications media and channels, and 4) development of appropriate educational materials. Task forces of educators and clientele for audience involvement are essential in planning and testing educational methods. When situations involve political, legal, and policy aspects, two task forces are needed: 1) a multidisciplinary educational group of scientists and educators to prepare objective usable information, and 2) an action group of clientele to communicate potential impacts of political, legal or policy action. Liaison between two groups is very important. Contemporary examples are presented.     

Veterinary authorities and animal welfare organizations--is cooperation possible?

Veterinarians and private animal welfare workers both work for the importance of animal welfare in our society. Although both work for a common cause, co-operation and communication between the veterinary administration and animal welfare members is often difficult. This paper will demonstrate the cause of problems between the two bodies and the benefits of co-operation will be assessed. Strategies to optimise the co-operation between the veterinary administration and animal rights organisations will be described using the local district Kleve as an example. Experiences with the animal welfare societies in this region will be illustrated with the aim to show the important supporting possibilities of the animal rights organisations to back the official authorities activities. Also the need to encourage the partly disappointing co-operation between these two bodies with the exchange of information would be beneficial for both bodies.     

Natural living—a precondition for animal welfare in organic farming

This article discusses animal welfare in organic farming systems in relation to values and aims in organic farming. It sums up experiences from a 4-year interdisciplinary project. An important finding is that animal welfare is understood somewhat differently in organic farming from what is common in conventional agriculture. It is interpreted in terms of natural living, which includes the possibility to perform a natural behaviour, feed adapted to the animal's physiology and a natural environment. Some of the criticism of animal welfare in organic farming may stem from different understandings of what “welfare” actually means. However, although welfare is an important aim in organic farming, the overall concern is to develop sustainable farming systems. This causes some welfare dilemmas. For example, a healthy system does not automatically mean good welfare for the individual. Based on available literature the actual welfare situation in organic systems was scrutinized. Unfortunately little research has been done, but a careful conclusion was that animal health is as good or better than in conventional farming—with the exception of parasitic diseases. Organic farming systems have a “welfare potential”, but organic farmers must deal with the dilemmas and take animal welfare issues seriously.     

Assessing attitudes toward farm animal welfare: a national survey of animal science faculty members

A survey to measure attitudes toward farm animal welfare was developed. We targeted animal science faculty because of their influence on animal production in the United States. We initially interviewed 34 faculty members from a large Midwestern public university to assist with questionnaire development. After our written survey was developed, we pilot-tested our questionnaire at this same university. Thereafter, we sent an e-mail advance notice, first survey, and follow-up survey/thank-you to the national population of animal science faculty members. With an n = 446 (response rate = 45%), we observed the following: 51% (for layer birds), 58% (for meat birds), 66% (for swine), 84% (for dairy), 86% (for sheep), and 87% (for beef) of our respondents agreed that the predominant methods used to produce various types of animal products provided appropriate levels of animal welfare. Our findings showed that greater than 90% of respondents support general principles of animal welfare, such as keeping animals free from unnecessary fear and distress. However, specific practices that have been shown to elicit distress (e.g., castration without anesthetic) were deemed a concern by only 32% of the respondents. Various industry practices/outcomes were assessed for level of concern and varied from a high of 83% of respondents agreeing that flooring effects on lameness in intensively farmed animals are a concern, to a low of 16% agreeing that early weaning in pigs is a concern. Summed attitude scores showed significant relationships with the demographic variables of gender (P < 0.01) and political ideology (P < 0.01), with women and those holding more liberal political views being more concerned about farm animal welfare issues. Gaining an awareness of various stakeholders' attitudes (e.g., animal scientists, veterinarians, producers, and consumers) toward farm animal welfare will assist animal welfare scientists in knowing which research topics to emphasize and, perhaps, where critical gaps in accessibility of knowledge exist.