Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Animal Welfare in Different Human Cultures, Traditions and Religious Faiths

  • Szucs, E. (University of West Hungary, Faculty for Agricultural and Food Sciences Faculty Mosonmagyarovar) ;
  • Geers, R. (Catholic University of Leuven, Quality Care in Animal Production) ;
  • Jezierski, T. (Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding) ;
  • Sossidou, E.N. (Hellenic Agricultural Organization-DEMETER, Directorate Generale of Agricultural Research (formerly NAGREF), Veterinary Research Institute) ;
  • Broom, D.M. (Centre for Animal Welfare and Anthrozoology, Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge)
  • Published : 2012.11.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Animal welfare has become a growing concern affecting acceptability of agricultural systems in many countries around the world. An earlier Judeo-Christian interpretation of the Bible (1982) that dominion over animals meant that any degree of exploitation was acceptable has changed for most people to mean that each person has responsibility for animal welfare. This view was evident in some ancient Greek writings and has parallels in Islamic teaching. A minority view of Christians, which is a widespread view of Jains, Buddhists and many Hindus, is that animals should not be used by humans as food or for other purposes. The commonest philosophical positions now, concerning how animals should be treated, are a blend of deontological and utilitarian approaches. Most people think that extremes of poor welfare in animals are unacceptable and that those who keep animals should strive for good welfare. Hence animal welfare science, which allows the evaluation of welfare, has developed rapidly.

Keywords

References

  1. Aquinas, T. 1963. Summa Theologiae. Man Made to God's Image, 13 vol., Ed. Edmund Hill, Black Friars, London.
  2. Aquinas, T. 1969. Summa Theologiae: The Old Law, 29 vol., Ed. David Boure, Black Friars, London.
  3. Bentham, J. 1789. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. London.
  4. Broom, D. M. 1986. Indicators of poor welfare. Br. Vet. J. 142: 524-526. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-1935(86)90109-0
  5. Broom, D. M. 1991. Assessing welfare and suffering. Behav. Processes 25:117-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-6357(91)90014-Q
  6. Broom, D. M. 2001. The use of the concept Animal Welfare in European conventions, regulations and directives. Food Chain 2001, Uppsala, Sweden, p. 4.
  7. Broom, D. M. 2003. The evolution of morality and religion. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
  8. Broom, D. M. 2006. The evolution of morality. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 100:20-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.04.008
  9. Broom, D. M. 2010. Animal welfare: an aspect of care, sustainability, and food quality required by the public. J. Vet. Med. Educ. 37:83-88. https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme.37.1.83
  10. Broom, D. M. 2011. A history of animal welfare science. Acta Biotheor. 59:121-137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10441-011-9123-3
  11. Ch'eng brothers and Chu Hsi 1976. Chin-ssu lu - Reflections on things at hand. Meiji shoin, Ichikawa Yasuji, Tokyo, 27:676.
  12. Descartes, R. 1649. Letter to Henry Moore, February 5. In: Descartes (Ed. A. Kenny). 1970. Philosophical Letters. Oxford University Press, London, UK.
  13. Dawkins, M. S. 1980. Animal suffering: The Science of Animal Welfare. Ed. Chapman and Hall, London, UK.
  14. Duncan, I. J. H. 1981. Animal rights - animal welfare, a scientist's assessment. Poult. Sci. 60:489-499. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0600489
  15. Etter, L. 2004. Etika kulonbozo nezopontbol (Ethics for different approaches). Ist Meeting on Animal Health, October 21, Kaposvari Allategeszsegtani Nap, Kaposvar, Hungary.
  16. Friend, T. H. 1990. Teaching animal welfare in the land grant universities. J. Anim. Sci. 68:3462-3467.
  17. Gatward, G. J. 2001. Livestock ethics. Chalcombe Publications, Lincoln, UK.
  18. Kyokai, B. D. 1966. The teaching of Buddha. Tokyo, Kosaido, In: Animal revolution: Changing Attitudes towards Speciesism (Ed. R. D. Ryder) 1989. Cambridge, Basil Blackwell, Massachusetts, USA.
  19. Linzey, A. 1987. Christianity and the Rights of Animals. London SPCK.
  20. Linzey, A. 1996. 'Speciesism'. In: Dictionary of Ethics (Ed. P. Barry Clarke and A. Linzey). Theology and Society. Routledge, London - New York.
  21. Mill, J. S. 1863. Utilitarianism. Ed. Longman, London, UK.
  22. Naconecy, C. M. 2006. Etica e Animais: um Guia de Argumentacao Filosofica. Ed. EDIPUCRS, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
  23. Pascalev, A. K. 2004. We and They: Animal Welfare in the Era of Advanced Agricultural Biotechnology. Conference at the 55th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, Bled, Slovenia, p. 5.
  24. Regan, T. 1983. A case for animal rights. University of California Press, Berkeley, USA.
  25. Ridley, M. 1996. The origins of virtue. Ed. Viking, London, UK.
  26. Rohr, J. 1989. Animal rights: Opposing Viewpoints. Greenhaven Press, San Diego, USA.
  27. Rollin, B. E. 1990. Animal welfare, animal rights and agriculture. J. Anim. Sci. 68:3456-3461.
  28. Ryder, R. D. 1989. Animal revolution: Changing Attitudes towards Speciesism. Basil Blackwell, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
  29. Singer, P. 1975. Animal liberation: A New Ethics for our Treatment of Animals. New York Review/Random House, New York, USA.
  30. Singer, P. 1979. Killing humans and animals. Inquiry 22:145-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/00201747908601869
  31. Staller, B. L. 1995. Animal welfare - Instruction Materials. National FFA Foundation, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
  32. Szucs, E. 1999. Gondolatok az allatitermek-eloallítas nehany etikai, etologiai kerdesehez (Considerations to ethics and ethology of animal production). Allattenyesztes es Takarmányozás (Hungarian Journal of Animal Production). Herceghalom 48:541-552.
  33. Szucs, E., T. Jezierski, T. Kaleta, C. Abrahám, V. Poikalainen, E. Sossidou and J. Praks. 2006. Ethical views concerning how to treat animals. Part A: Social concerns. Chapter IV. In: Livestock Production and Society (Ed. R. Geers and F. Madec), pp. 65-67. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Netherlands.
  34. The Bible. 1982. New King James Version. Thomas Nelson Inc., USA.
  35. The Holy Qur'an 1997. Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia Library, http://xtf.lib.virginia.edu/xtf/view?docId=modern_english/uvaGenText/tei/HolKora.xml
  36. Vaswani, J. P. 2003. Interview in Hinduism Today, Jan/Feb/March, pp. 52-53.
  37. Waal, F. de 1996. Good natured. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
  38. Wade, R. 2004. Animal theology and ethical concerns. Australian E-Journal of Theology. Issue 2 - ISSN 1448-6322 http://aejt.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/395679/AEJT_2.15_Wade_Animal_Theology.pdf

Cited by

  1. Rumination time as a potential predictor of common diseases in high-productive Holstein dairy cows vol.84, pp.04, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022029917000619
  2. Animal Welfare in Nepal pp.1532-7604, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2018.1519437
  3. Human-Animal Relationships in the Middle East vol.11, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3167/ame.2016.110101
  4. Human-Animal Relationships in the Middle East vol.11, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3167/ame.2016.110101
  5. The Perception of Animal Experimentation Ethics among Indian Teenage School Pupils vol.45, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1177/026119291704500107
  6. India - an untapped market for halal products vol.10, pp.3, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1108/jima-09-2018-0179
  7. The Benefits of Improving Animal Welfare from the Perspective of Livestock Stakeholders across Asia vol.9, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9040123
  8. A Minimally Nonanthropocentric Economics: What Is It, Is It Necessary, and Can It Avert the Biodiversity Crisis? vol.71, pp.8, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biab045