Search

The year 2024 marks the bicentenary of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), the world's first registered animal welfare organization, established in 1824. This analysis explores Thomas Hardy's response to animal rights discourses during his life, with special emphasis on the common pursuits of the RSPCA as a champion of animal rights and of Hardy as an evolutionary meliorist who cared about animals. As evidenced by Hardy's literary and non-literary, public and personal writings, his vision of a humanitarian future was inseparable from the question of animal rights, including the plights of working / performing animals, and cruelty to animals in slaughterhouses, battlefields, laboratories and animal sports. Although Han dy was disappointed in his aims to save animals and to alter people's consciousness on the issue, animal rights movements have come a long way through decades of struggle, as reflected in the achievements of the RSPCA and other animal welfare movements. Hardy's attitude toward animals also anticipates subsequent developments in animal studies, including post-humanist approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Animal ethics is a critical concern in the tourism industry with numerous accounts of unethical and exploitative practices. Not-for-profit animal rescue organisations, like Animal Aid Unlimited, offer a counter experience to this largely negative narrative by redefining tourist–animal interactions through volunteer tourism, where visitors help to rescue domesticated street animals, who are rarely included in tourism research. To address the lacuna in the academic literature, this study utilises a multi-method approach to build a case study to explore how such organisations can engage voluntourists to promote animal welfare and rights. Findings show that Animal Aid engages digital technology-enhanced approaches, especially information and communication technologies and social media, to heighten awareness and engagement in animal welfare and rights in part through tourism. The theory is hence proposed that while seemingly incongruous, some niche forms of tourist-animal interactions can support an animal rights ethic. As such, animal rescue tourism emerges as a seemingly distinct and alternative animal-based tourism experience requiring more research, especially in a digital era. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista de la Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales is the property of Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas, Fisicas y Naturales and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Ius et Praxis (07172877) is the property of Universidad de Talca and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Fronteiras is the property of Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In Animals, Ethic and Us, Dr. Madeleine L.H. Campbell offers insight into the moral landscape of human-animal relations through a specific ethical framework that rejects the rights of non-human animals, opting instead for a "qualified utilitarian approach" (2019, 9). For Campbell, animal ethics should not be bound to animal rights or the autonomy of individual animals; she asserts that animal rights should not factor into the moral consideration of animals at all. Since she does not confer animals a moral status or form of rights and instead relies on the utilitarian approach, Campbell attempts to locate the justifying logic of necessity (or non-necessity) in each of these issues and demonstrate how the human use of animals in a particular situation is, or is not, legitimate. There are some notable issues with this approach: Campbell's moral framework can essentially justify anything done to animals--if it is 'beneficial' to humans in any capacity. In this review, I briefly summarize her argument and its applications, then delve into some criticisms of her views. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I test the hypothesis proposed by Peter Singer that the philosophical case for animal liberation has been won, through a systematic review of papers published by philosophers between 1975 and 2020. There was a slight but statistically significant correlation between support for an animal liberation vegan position, with year of publication. Support for a better treatment of animals than currently sanctioned by society increased significantly among papers discussing general principles of animal ethics. Findings support a weaker version of Singer's hypothesis. Among the philosophical community there is greater support for animal liberation, but the debate has not been 'won'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this essay, I argue that those who embrace animal rights should also embrace primitivism--the view that humans should abandon modern technology and take up something like hunter-gatherer technology instead. I call my view "animal-rights primitivism" to distinguish it from human-centered arguments for primitivism. In particular, I employ a vital-needs framework to make my argument. I argue that hunter-gatherer technology is the least harmful kind of technology, it is sufficient to meet human vital needs, and it is possible for humans to make the transition to hunter-gatherer technology while still meeting their vital needs. Alternatively, I argue that even if humans cannot make the transition while still meeting their vital needs, they are responsible for putting themselves in that situation and therefore forfeit the right to aggress against the vital needs of other sentient species to do so. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I will argue that ethical intuitionism and Robert Audi's work on its moral epistemology as applied to Kant's formula of humanity can offer grounding and support for an animal rights position that approaches that of a view articulated by Tom Regan. The combination of these positions will be done by testing our intuitions concerning non-rational individuals--leading one, I argue, to an animal rights view. Then I will briefly note the skeptical concerns about the role of intuitions in our knowledge of the moral status of human animals and non-human animals alike. Ultimately, I will conclude that intuitions can support a case for animal rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Alcance is the property of Revista Alcance and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Research in animal ethics and Generation Z in the field of tourism is a little-explored topic. With a focus on the development of both research fields, the aim of this study was to determine if Generation Z in Spain justifies or rejects the use of animals in tourism attractions, and to establish which specific animal attractions are acceptable for Generation Z and which are not. The results indicated that Generation Z does not justify any of the animal attractions presented in the questionnaire. Generation Z does not accept any of the possible justifications for the existence of animal-based attractions, and all conditions under which animals must be treated at those attractions are important for Generation Z respondents. Females attach greater importance than males to all animal treatment conditions and express a greater rejection of all attractions as well as all justifications presented in the questionnaire. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Article puts forward a novel analogy between animal welfare law and international humanitarian law—two seemingly unrelated bodies of law that are both marked by the aporia of humanizing the inhumane. Through the comparative lens of the international laws of war and peace, this Article argues that existing animal welfare law is best understood as a kind of warfare law that regulates violent activities within an ongoing “war on animals.” It further submits that this animal warfare law needs to be complemented and counterbalanced by an animal law of peace, consisting of a jus animalis contra bellum and peacetime animal rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the proposed relationships between humans and animals in Just Hierarchy: Why Social Hierarchies Matter in China and the Rest of the World, by Daniel A. Bell and Wang Pei. Bell and Wang locate animals within structures of 'just hierarchies' in the human world, arguing for 'subordination without cruelty', and ranking animals according to the different relationships they have with the human community. This article examines the historical legacy of such claims of 'just hierarchy', discusses the problem of defining a just relationship between humans and animals, and questions the timing and effectiveness of reasserting our dominion over the animal kingdom in the present age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ideological delinquency of animal rights activists has been studied, but there is a lack of research into its impact on family members. The present study examines how 18 family members (nine parents, nine partners) of ideological lawbreaking animal rights activists perceived their relationship with the activists. The analysis of semi-structured interviews describes the reasons the family members joined activism and the differences between those who became law-abiding vs. those who became lawbreaking activists. The familial-ideological spin model explains the process of 'infection' by which family members can be drawn into ideological activity; some of them may experience familial-ideological criminal spin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We present the first records of the post-release follow-up and monitoring of a rehabilitated two-toed sloth (Choloepus hoffmanni) as well as freezing behavior and an inferred antagonistic interaction for this species. Two-toed sloths are nocturnal and arboreal mammals whose survival relies on their capability to remain undetected by predators. Nevertheless, in the Guayas province of Ecuador, they are among the most common mammal species in rehabilitation centers. The liberation of animals back to the forest is the main goal of rehabilitation, while the follow-up of post-release human support of animals facilitates their re-establishment in their natural habitat. Follow-up, direct observation, and Bluetooth-based monitoring of the two-toed sloths secured the survival of this species in this part of Ecuador. The range of detectability of the device used indicates its suitability for tracking low-mobility animals. After the first five days, the number of trees used per day increased, and 19 trees within 1152 m² were visited. Daylight and movement time range showed a correlation towards detectability. The follow-up effort allowed for keeping the two-toed sloth safe for 10 days after release. Due to the difficulty monitoring nocturnal animals, economic constraints in conservation, accessibility, and safety of the animals, biodegradable Bluetooth-based backpacks are recommended to ease the location of the animal and support its survival in the wild. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This, the first article in our co-edited Thematic Issue, "Eating Religiously: Food and Faith in the 21st Century" introduces Food, Culture and Society readers to the intriguing research questions posed by the volume's authors, who discussed these with us in a novel Israel Science Foundation-sponsored international conference at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in May 2019. We open this Introduction by presenting a contemporary paradox in which demands for resurrecting ancient animal sacrifices and encouraging the re-traditionalization of religious practices coexist with the growing influence of ecological, climate change and animal rights advocates' pressures to ban such sacrifices and embrace veganism. After adding a brief overview of the growing anthropological subfield of Food and Religion, we set out the main concepts that guide the structure of this volume and explicate the social, cultural and political importance that considerations of eating religiously bring to bear in the 21st century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Public Security & Public Order / Visuomenes Saugumas ir Viesoji Tvarka is the property of Mykolas Romeris University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses about the Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Social Workers (ANZASW) code of ethics. It mentions the association's code of ethics, starting with the ethical principle discussing the respect for the sentience of animals while in social work practice settings. It discusses the ethics represents social work's professional identity and collective aspirations.

In this article an argument for vegetarianism in Porphyry's (c. 234305) De abstinentia (III. 19) will be analyzed. This argument is today called the argument from marginal cases or, less controversially, the argument from species overlap. In brief, the argument states that any morally relevant criterion for moral patiency status (or for being brought within the sweep of justice) that is possessed by all human beings will not be possessed only by human beings. For example, all humans, but not only humans, are capable of experiencing pain; and while only humans are capable of solving complex mathematical problems, not all humans can do this. If a nonhuman animal has morally relevant characteristics a, b, c.. .n but lacks reason (or autonomy or language) and a human being has morally relevant characteristics a, b, c.n but lacks reason (or autonomy or language), then we have as much reason to believe that the nonhuman animal is a moral patient and deserving of justice as the human being. The place of this argument in Porphyry's philosophy will also be considered in light of Jonathan Barnes' and G. Fay Edwards' scholarship. The fact that the version of the argument in Porphyry is (as far as the author of the article is aware) the very first instance of the argument from species overlap is noteworthy considering the fact that the argument is still defended by many contemporary proponents of nonhuman animal rights, including Peter Singer, Tom Regan, Dale Jamieson, etc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article empirically examines if the relationship between animal abuse and intimate partner violence (often referred to as "the link") documented in samples of women accessing services from domestic violence shelters extends to a nationally representative sample of the general Canadian population. Nationally representative data from the 2014 Canadian General Social Survey are analyzed using hierarchical binary logistic regression models, with threats and actual abuse of pets as a predictor of physical and sexual intimate partner violence, controlling for several key sociodemographic variables. Actual and threatened abuse of pets by a romantic partner is a significant and sizable predictor of also reporting that partner perpetrated intimate partner violence, particularly physical and severe abuse. As the first study to use nationally representative data to assess the perpetration of animal abuse and IPV in current/recent relationships, this study makes significant contributions to the interdisciplinary literature on animal abuse and IPV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Animal cell-cultured meat has been discursively positioned as the solution to global food systems issues. • This has impacts on regulatory scope and responses. • Current problematizations serve the dominant ideology maintaining the intensive use of animals in food systems. • There is a need for animal-centered perspectives in policy and regulatory debates around animal cell-cultured meat. This paper draws attention to how 'problems' were constructed at the USDA-FDA Joint Public Meeting on Use of Animal Cell Culture Technology in 2018 and the implications of these discursive constructs for the governance of animals in food systems. The findings demonstrate what problems animal cell-cultured meat has been positioned as the solution to, and what problems emerge from this new technology that regulators are expected to respond to. The problem representation and the solutions posed reproduce understandings that normalize and promote high and increasing levels of animal flesh consumption and related intensive uses of animals. With relevance for various academic disciplines, and policy-making and activist communities, this analysis offers insight from a critical animal studies lens into the role discourse plays in the governance of food systems that in turn shape the lives and bodies of animals in this emerging regulatory space. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two problems are considered here. One relates to who has moral status, and the other relates to who has moral responsibility. The criteria for mattering morally have long been disputed, and many humans and nonhuman animals have been considered "marginal cases," on the contested edges of moral considerability and concern. The marginalization of humans and other species is frequently the pretext for denying their rights, including the rights to health care, to reproductive freedom, and to bodily autonomy. There is broad agreement across cultural and philosophical traditions about the capacities and responsibilities of moral agents. I propose an inclusive and expansive way of thinking about moral status, situating it not in the characteristics or capacities of individuals, but in the responsibilities and obligations of moral agents. Moral agents, under this view, are not privileged or entitled to special treatment but rather have responsibilities. I approach this by considering some African communitarian conceptions of moral status and moral agency. I propose that moral agency can also be more expansive and include not just individual moral agents but collective entities that have some of the traits of moral agents: power, freedom, and the capacity to recognize and act on the demands of morality and acknowledge and respect the rights of others. Expanding who and what is a moral agent correspondingly extends moral responsibility for respecting rights and fostering the conditions for the health and wellbeing of humans and animals onto the collective entities who uniquely have the capacity to attend to global-scale health threats such as pandemics and human-caused climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

COVID-19 is a reminder that human, nonhuman, and environmental health are linked, and so efforts to improve human, nonhuman, and environmental health should be linked as well. But current efforts to link these issues fall short by not doing enough for humans, not doing enough for nonhumans, and focusing narrowly on health instead of expansively on health, welfare, and rights. This paper surveys the case for respecting and promoting human and nonhuman welfare, health, and rights simultaneously. It then surveys the impacts of COVID-19 on human and nonhuman populations and proposes steps that humans can take to respect and promote human and nonhuman health, welfare, and rights ethically and effectively in this context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay argues that the global response to COVID-19 should lead to new thinking and action, and specifically, a new relationship with the nonhuman world that is centered on mutuality and respect, not commodification and exploitation. Such a response would acknowledge and embed concepts like ecological justice and One Welfare in policy and practice, particularly regarding the consequences of intensive animal agriculture and production of monocultures of feedstock for the billions of farmed animals used in food production each year. Drawing on examples from the Global South and Global North, the essay suggests ways forward that provide opportunities for new thinking, research, and action, with the COVID-19 crisis contextualized by the urgency of the climate and biodiversity crises. With deep inequalities and infringement of rights embedded in each of these global challenges, successfully addressing them likely depends on useful disruptions in, and a bridging of, the divides that have separated human and nonhuman rights and have limited the intersections between public health, the environment, and animal welfare and rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic has shone a bright light on industrial slaughterhouses in the United States and their impacts on the vulnerable beings--both human and animal--they exploit. But the severity of these impacts is the result of a long history of failed regulatory oversight. This paper highlights the inadequacies of the current regulatory system in the United States and how they have contributed to dangerous conditions for slaughterhouse workers, environmental degradation, and severe animal suffering. Further, it argues that a rights-centered One Health approach would provide the necessary conceptual foundation for a new regulatory framework that can meaningfully address the interconnected rights, health, and well-being of humans, animals, and the environment. As a first step in establishing this new framework, the United States should create a federal Slaughterhouse Oversight Commission to strengthen the rights, health, and well-being of humans and animals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Public Security & Public Order / Visuomenes Saugumas ir Viesoji Tvarka is the property of Mykolas Romeris University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)