Good animal welfare in a sustainable food system

Abstract

Debates on animal welfare have increased in quantity and intensity. This applies particularly to animalwelfare issues in food production, positively and negatively. Polarization is a diagnosis that describes anincreased distance between what can be understood as ecocentric and anthropocentric extremes andviewpoints on what good animal welfare is. It is not only those who are in direct relation to animalswho are engaged, actors and activists who are not connected to, for example, livestock production, arealso involved. In this paper, we explore what animal welfare means in a sustainable food system and askif animals can be integrated into communication on how good animal welfare can be achieved. Whatis best for animals? Research on animal welfare started with ethical concerns about the quality of lifeof animals (Fraser et al., 1997, Tolo and Kittelsen, unpublished data). But how can ethics be integratedinto human-animal communication? While acknowledging Habermas’ (1995) divide between humanand non-human agents in communicative action, we are inspired by Hendlin and Otts’ (2016) andNowak et al.’s (2022) revision of Habermas’ anthropocentric theoretical foundation and practicaldiscourse and add Nussbaum’s (2022) capability approach, to allow for the inclusion of a discussion ofthe moral importance, wellbeing, and functioning as ascribed to animals. With this, we are extendingthe discourse community beyond human communication. Through the inclusion of both non-humanand human agency, we discuss how we can achieve good animal welfare in a sustainable food system. (PDF) Good animal welfare in a sustainable food system. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/384063773_Good_animal_welfare_in_a_sustainable_food_system [accessed Jan 03 2025].

Good animal welfare in a sustainable food system