Fundamental moral attitudes to animals and their role in judgment: An empirical model to describe fundamental moral attitudes to animals and their role in judgment on the culling of healthy animals during an animal disease epidemic

Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 341-359

  Cohen, Nina E ^a   Stassen, Elsbeth N ^a   Brom, Frans W A ^a,b  

^a WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b Rathenau Institute KNAW   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Animal disease epidemics; Fundamental moral attitudes to animals; Judgment on animal issues; Philosophical animal ethics; Value of an animal's life

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL WELFARE; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; CULLING; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; ETHICS; PHILOSOPHY; THEORETICAL STUDY;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 67650644545     PISSN: 11877863     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10806-009-9157-6     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Anderson, I. (2002). Foot and mouth disease: Lessons to be learned inquiry report HC888. London: The Stationary Office.
2. Anderson, E. (2004). Animal rights and the values of nonhuman life. In C. R. Sunstein & M. C. Nussbaum (Eds.), Animal rights, current debates and new directions (pp. 277-299). US: Oxford University Press.
3. Anthony, R. (2004). Risk communication, value judgments, and the public-policy maker relationship in a climate of public sensitivity toward animals: Revisiting Britain's foot and mouth crisis. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 17(4-5), 363-383.
4. Appleby, M. C., & Sandøe, P. (2002). Philosophical debate on the nature of well-being: Implications for animal welfare. Animal Welfare, 11, 283-294.
5. Bekoff, M. (2007). The emotional lives of animals. Novaro, California: New World Library.
6. Bentham, J. (1789). Duty to minimize suffering. In P. A. B. Clark & A. Linzey (Eds.), Political theory and animal rights (pp. 135-137). Pluto: London.
7. Carruthers, P. (1992). The animals issue: Moral theory in practice. UK: Cambridge University Press.
8. Cohen, N. E., Stassen, E. N., & van Asseldonk, M. A. P. M. (2007). Social-ethical issues concerning the control strategy of animal diseases in the European Union: A survey. Agriculture and Human Values, 24(4), 499-511.
9. Crispin, S. M., Roger, P. A., O'Hare, H., & Binns, S. H. (2002). The 2001 foot and mouth disease epidemic in the United Kingdom: Animal welfare perspectives. Revue Scientifique et Technique (International Office of Epizootics), 21(3), 877-883.
10. Cumbria FMD Inquiry Panel. (2002). Cumbria foot and mouth disease inquiry report. Retrieved June 2004 (August) from www.cumbria.gov.uk.
11. de Cock Buning, Tj., Kupper, F., Krijgsman, l., Bout, H., & Bunders, J. (2005). Denken over de eigen waarde van dieren in Nederland. Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam: Athena Instituut.
12. Degrazia, D. (1999). Animal ethics around the turn of the twenty-first century. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 11, 11-129.
13. Eurobarometer (2007). 270/wave 66.1 - TNS Opinion and Social, 200.
14. Farm Animal Welfare Council. (2002). Foot and mouth disease 2001 and animal welfare: Lessons for the future. London: Report of the FAWC. January.
15. Fidler, M. (2003). Animal status as a response to pet owner experience. Anthrozoos, 16(1), 75-82.
16. Franklin, J. H. (2005). Animal rights and moral philosophy (pp. 31-52). Columbia: University Press.
17. Franklin, A. (2007). Human-nonhuman animal relationships in Australia: An overview of results from the first national survey and follow-up case studies 2000-2004. Society and Animals, 15, 7-27.
18. Herzog, H. A., & Dorr, L. B. (2000). Electronically available surveys of attitudes towards animals. Society & Animals, 8(2), 183-190.
19. Huirne, R. B. M., Mourits, M., Tomassen, F., Vlieger, J. J., & de Vogelzang, T. A. (2002). MKZ Verleden, heden en toekoms Over de preventie en bestrijding van MKZ report. LEI: Den Haag.
20. Hursthouse, R. (1999). On virtue ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21. Hyers, L. L. (2006). Myths used to legitimize the exploitation of animals: An application of Social Dominance Theory. Anthrozoös, 19(3), 194-210.
22. Institute for Health Research. (2002). Evidence submitted to Cumbria foot and mouth disease inquiry: Report. UK: Lancaster University. April.
23. Jonson, A. R., & Toulmin, S. (1988). The abuse of casuistry: A history of moral reasoning. Berkeley: University of California Press.
24. Knight, S., & Barnett, L. (2008). Justifying attitudes towards animal use: A qualitative study of people's views and beliefs. Anthrozoös, 21(1), 31-42.
25. Knight, S., Nunkoosing, K., Vrij, A., & Cherryman, J. (2003). Using grounded theory to examine people's attitudes towards how animals are used. Society & Animals, 11(4), 307-327.
26. van Wetenschappen, Koninklijke Nederlandse Academie. (2002). Bestrijding van mond- en klauwzeer, 'stamping out' of gebruik maken van wetenschappelijk onderzoek. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Report Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen. January.
27. Laurence, C. J. (2002). Animal welfare consequences in England and Wales of the 2001 epidemic of foot and mouth disease. Revue Scientifique et Technique (International Office of Epizootics), 21(3), 863-868.
28. Macnaghten, P. (2001). Animal futures, public attitudes and sensibilities towards animals and biotechnology in contemporary Britain. UK: Institute for Environment, Philosophy and Public Policy for the Agricultural and Environmental Biotechnology Commission.
29. Macnaghten, P. (2004). Animals in their nature, a case study on public attitudes to animals, genetic modification and 'nature'. Sociology, 38(3), 533-551.
30. Matthews, S., & Herzog, H. A. (1997). Personality and attitudes towards the treatment of animals. Society & Animals, 5(2), 169-175(7).
31. McMahan, J. (2002). The ethics of killing: Problems at the margins of life. New York: Oxford University Press.
32. Meijboom, Franck L. B.,Cohen, Nina E., Stassen, E. N., Brom, Frans W. A. (in press). Beyond the prevention of harm: Animal disease policy as a moral question. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics.
33. Mepham, B. (2000a). A framework for the ethical analysis of novel foods: The ethical matrix. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 12, 165-176.
34. Mepham, B. (2000b). "Würde der Kreatur" and the common morality. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 13, 65-78.
35. Mepham, B. (2001). Foot and mouth disease and British agriculture: Ethics in a crisis. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14(3), 339-347.
36. Mepham, B. (2004). Farm animal diseases in context. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 17(4-5), 331-340.
37. Miura, A., Bradshaw, S., & Tanida, H. (2002). Childhood experiences and attitudes towards animal issues: A comparison of young adults in Japan and the UK. Animal Welfare, 11, 437-448.
38. Murphy-Lawless, J. (2004). The impact of BSE and FMD on ethics and democratic process. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 17(4-5), 385-403.
39. Nederlandse Vereniging list Bescherming van Dieren. (2004). Reactie van de Dierenbescherming op de evaluatie van de vogelpestcrisis 2003 n.a.v. het rapport van het Bureau Berenschot en de reactie van het kabinet. Report. The Netherlands: The Hague.
40. Noordhuizen-Stassen, E. N., Rutgers, L. J. E., & Swabe, J. M. (2003). Het doden van gehouden dieren Report.: Utrecht University.
41. Posner, R. A. (2004). Animal rights: Legal, philosophical, and pragmatic perspectives. In C. R. Sunstein & M. C. Nussbaum (Eds.), Animal rights, current debates and new directions US (pp. 51-78). New York: Oxford University Press.
42. Raad voor het Landelijk Gebied and Raad voor Dierenaangelegenheden. (2003). Dierziektebeleid met draagvlak, advies over de bestrijding van zeer besmettelijke dierziekten, deel 1, advies. RLG 03/8 RDA 2003/08 (December).
43. Raad voor het Landelijk Gebied and Raad voor Dierenaangelegenheden. (2004). Dierziektebeleid met draagvlak, advies over de bestrijding van zeer besmettelijke dierziekten, deel 2 Onderbouwing van het advies. RLG 03/8 RDA 2004/01 (January).
44. Regan, T. (1983). The case for animal rights. Berkeley: University of California Press.
45. Scruton, R. (2000). Animal rights and wrongs (Vol. 3rd). London: Demos.
46. Serpell, J. A. (2004). Factors influencing human attitudes to animals and their welfare. Animal Welfare, 13, S145-S151.
47. Singer, P. (1995). Practical ethics (Vol. 2nd). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
48. Stafleu, F. R., Lauwere, C. C., de Greef, K. H., & Dudink, S. (2004). Boerenethiek. Eigen waarden als basis voor een 'nieuwe' ethiek. Een inventarisatie report.: Utrecht University, Ethics Institute.
49. Taylor, P. (1986). Respect for nature, a theory of environmental ethics. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
50. van der Berg, B. (2002). Evaluatie van het welzijn van dieren tijdens de mond- en klauwzeercrisis in Nederland in 2001 report. Den Haag: Nederlandse Vereniging tot Bescherming van Dieren.
51. van Haaften, E. H., & Kersten, P. H. (2002). Veerkracht: Report of Alterra, no. 539. Wageningen: Alterra.
52. van Velzen, K., & Dekker, I. (2003). Niet ruimen, maar prikken! Hoe Nederland opnieuw massaal gezonde dieren liet afmaken. The Hague: Report Tweede-Kamerfractie SP. July.
53. Warren, M. A. (1997). Moral status: Obligations to persons and other living things. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
54. Wise, S. (2004). In C. R. Sunstein & M. C. Nussbaum (Eds.), Animal rights, current debates and new directions (pp. 19-51). US: Oxford University Press.
55. Woods, A. (2004). Why slaughter? The cultural dimensions of Britain's foot and mouth disease control policy, 1892-2001. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14(3), 341-362.