Animal farm

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/506005a

IF: 64.8

2014-02-01

Nature

Abstract:Europe’s policy-makers must not buy animal-rights activists’ arguments that addiction is a social, rather than a medical, problem.

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The Political World in Fiction——An Interpretation of George Orwell’s Animal Farm

Pan Yi-he

2008-01-01

Abstract:George Orwells ’Animal Farm is generally accepted as one of the best political fictions in the 20th century,in which the author,through a description of the rise and fall of the animal Utopia and characterization of animals,expresses his insight and political views of the society and his hope to find a way to reasons and a way out of the political gloominess and the fatal cycle.
The animal scientist in a changing society

S Spencer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0739-7240(99)00027-2

Abstract:Despite the lack of any credible scientific evidence to oppose the use of animal performance-enhancing agents, acceptance of performance enhancers seems no closer than it was a decade ago--at least among the European Community and its major trading partners. Consumers are suspicious of new technologies, and politicians are wary of legalizing growth promoters when the relative price of animal products has never been cheaper. Among the factors that have recently re-fuelled consumer concerns over farming methods are: bovine spongiform encephalopathy, cloning of farm animals, and genetic manipulation of crops. Meanwhile, politicians try to balance the interests of the environmentalist, farming, and welfare lobbies with the politico-economic realities of an expanding European Community and the demands of the GATT agreement. In the United States, where corporate influence over political actions is more overtly established than in Europe, some new technologies have been introduced. This has further antagonized many consumers. As scientists with a direct interest in animal performance enhancers, we need to re-assess our positions--if for no other reason than to protect our research (and personal) incomes. We could probably better protect our own interests--and those of the farming community--if we raised our eyes from the microscope to look at the wider view. There are two challenges for animal production scientists: to identify truly acceptable ways of enhancing animal performance and to be highly active in bringing scientific consensus to the attention of both the public and the political establishments.
Animal welfare: a complex domestic and international public-policy issue--who are the key players?

A C David Bayvel,Nicki Cross

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme.37.1.3

Abstract:Animal-welfare issues are usually portrayed in the media in a black-and-white fashion, with simple, single-perspective solutions proposed for what are often, in fact, complex policy issues. In this article, we argue that animal welfare is a multifaceted international and domestic public-policy issue that must take account of not only scientific, ethical, and economic issues but also religious, cultural, and international trade policy considerations. Management of animal welfare at a government policy level also requires an approach based on incremental change. Such change must be both science based and ethically principled, and the rate of change must recognize both the expectations of society and the constraints on the animal user. Ideally, such change should involve full ownership and buy-in from the affected animal user group. The range of stakeholders involved in the animal-welfare debate includes industry and producer groups, science bodies, and animal-welfare non-governmental organizations and professional groups, including the veterinary and legal professions. The veterinary profession, in particular, is expected to play an animal-welfare leadership role, and we discuss expectation versus reality at both a national and an international level. This latter discussion includes specific reference to the role of the World Organisation for Animal Health (the OIE) as an intergovernmental organization representing 175 countries and details some of the major achievements since the OIE assumed its international animal-welfare standard-setting role in 2002. We also address the role of the veterinary profession at national, regional, and international levels.
12. Intensive Animal Farming and Moral Status

William Abel,Elizabeth Kahn,Tom Parr,Andrew Walton

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/hepl/9780198783275.003.0012

2021-02-18

Abstract:This chapter studies which principles should govern the state’s regulation of the treatment of non-human animals raised for human consumption. It defends the claim that it is wrong to inflict pain on or to kill animals, and that the state should prohibit intensive animal farming on these bases. The chapter then considers the objection that there is no moral duty to act in this way because animals are not part of the relevant community of moral concern. It demonstrates that it is implausible to restrict the scope of moral duties in this way. Finally, the chapter explores the claim that it would be wrong for the state to enforce compliance with these duties, but it contends that limiting the state’s role in this way leads to various implausible conclusions regarding how it should regulate the treatment of both animals and humans.
Animal board invited review: Animal source foods in healthy, sustainable, and ethical diets - An argument against drastic limitation of livestock in the food system

Frédéric Leroy,Fabien Abraini,Ty Beal,Paula Dominguez-Salas,Pablo Gregorini,Pablo Manzano,Jason Rowntree,Stephan van Vliet

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2022.100457

IF: 3.73

animal

Abstract:Animal source foods are evolutionarily appropriate foods for humans. It is therefore remarkable that they are now presented by some as unhealthy, unsustainable, and unethical, particularly in the urban West. The benefits of consuming them are nonetheless substantial, as they offer a wide spectrum of nutrients that are needed for cell and tissue development, function, and survival. They play a role in proper physical and cognitive development of infants, children, and adolescents, and help promote maintenance of physical function with ageing. While high-red meat consumption in the West is associated with several forms of chronic disease, these associations remain uncertain in other cultural contexts or when consumption is part of wholesome diets. Besides health concerns, there is also widespread anxiety about the environmental impacts of animal source foods. Although several production methods are detrimental (intensive cropping for feed, overgrazing, deforestation, water pollution, etc.) and require substantial mitigation, damaging impacts are not intrinsic to animal husbandry. When well-managed, livestock farming contributes to ecosystem management and soil health, while delivering high-quality foodstuffs through the upcycling of resources that are otherwise non-suitable for food production, making use of marginal land and inedible materials (forage, by-products, etc.), integrating livestock and crop farming where possible has the potential to benefit plant food production through enhanced nutrient recycling, while minimising external input needs such as fertilisers and pesticides. Moreover, the impacts on land use, water wastage, and greenhouse gas emissions are highly contextual, and their estimation is often erroneous due to a reductionist use of metrics. Similarly, whether animal husbandry is ethical or not depends on practical specificities, not on the fact that animals are involved. Such discussions also need to factor in that animal husbandry plays an important role in culture, societal well-being, food security, and the provision of livelihoods. We seize this opportunity to argue for less preconceived assumptions about alleged effects of animal source foods on the health of the planet and the humans and animals involved, for less top-down planning based on isolated metrics or (Western) technocratic perspectives, and for more holistic and circumstantial approaches to the food system.
Character Metaphors in George Orwell’s Animal Farm

Dian Fajrina

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v3i1.3391

2016-03-13

Studies in English Language and Education

Abstract:Animal Farm was written by George Orwell in 1944 to criticize the Soviet Union leaders and their administration represented by animal characters. The objective of this study was to find out the resemblances between the character of Soviet Union leaders at the time the novel was written and those depicted in the novel. In analysing the objective of this study, content analysis was used. The data are the dialogues and other information in the novel concerning the metaphors of characters between the Soviet Union leaders of the 20th century and those in Animal Farm. The writer finds out that Jones metaphors Nicholas II, the last Tsar of Russian Monarchy, Old Major with his speech metaphors Karl Marx with his Communist Manifesto, Napoleon as Stalin, Snowball as Trotsky, Squealer as Pravda, the Russian Newspaper at that time, Frederick as German and Boxer as the type of gullibility proletariat. Indeed, George Orwell’s timeless work reminds us that totalitarianism could be harmful to one society.
Why Not Phase Out Animal Experimentation? Considering Objections from Freedom of Inquiry and Cross-Border Displacement

Nico D. Müller

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0963180124000288

2024-09-14

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics

Abstract:Animal experimentation raises value conflicts between animal protection and other goods, such as freedom of inquiry or health and safety. If governments can phase out the practice by non-prohibitive incentive-setting, the pro tanto moral rationale for doing so is obvious. So why should they not? This article first sketches a fictional scenario in which a government adopts a phase-out plan for animal experimentation. It then considers two moral objections to this plan: First, the plan unduly restricts freedom of inquiry, and second, it merely displaces animal experimentation across borders and thus fails to reduce animal suffering. Both arguments are refined premise by premise to articulate their strongest versions. The two objections can help to narrow down desiderata for good phase-out plans. However, they do not provide a compelling case against phase-out planning as such because they miss its incremental and constructive nature. Unless better arguments can be provided, it appears that government inaction on phasing out animal experimentation lacks moral justification.

social sciences, biomedical,health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Palliative Farming

Ole Martin Moen,Katrien Devolder

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-022-09404-7

Abstract:Billions of animals live and die under deplorable conditions in factory farms. Despite significant efforts to reduce human consumption of animal products and to encourage more humane farming practices, the number of factory-farmed animals is nevertheless on an upward trajectory. In this paper, we suggest that the high levels of suffering combined with short life-expectancies make the situation of many factory-farmed animals relevantly similar to that of palliative patients. Building on this, we discuss the radical option of seeking to reduce the suffering of factory-farmed animals through the use of drugs that alleviate pain and distress, administered under a regimen where experiential wellbeing is prioritized over the aim of avoiding drug-dependence.
People and Their Animal Companions: Navigating Moral Constraints in a Harmful, Yet Meaningful World

Cheryl Abbate

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-022-01852-z

2022-07-30

Philosophical Studies

Abstract:Those who claim to be committed to the moral equality of animals don’t always act as if they think all animals are equal. For instance, many animal liberationists spend hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars each year on food, toys, and medical care for their companion animals. Surely, more animals would be helped if the money spent on companion animals were donated to farmed animal protection organizations. Moreover, many animal liberationists feed their companion animals the flesh of farmed animals, and some let their cats roam outdoors, foreseeing that they will kill wildlife. Maybe these companion-animal loving animal liberationists are moral hypocrites. Or maybe their behavior is justified. I defend the latter claim. By developing an ethic that emphasizes the moral significance of life-meaning and recognizes the important role that companion animals play in giving meaning to human lives, I argue that there are stringent side-constraints that apply to companion animals, but not to other animals. Consequently, it isn’t hypocritical to prioritize companion animals over other animals. We can have (and value) our carnivorous companions and be animal liberationists too.
Animal Rights in Greece: Legislation and Perceptions

Gerasimos Filippas,Spyridon Stelios,Kostas Theologou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.59324/ejtas.2024.2(3).76

2024-05-01

Abstract:Animal rights are a controversial issue that often causes ethical dilemmas within modern civilization. Philosophical thought plays a key role in this debate, through various theories that put forward the establishment of moral rights to animals. All this is also reflected in the adoption of strict legal frameworks in favor of animal protection throughout the Western world. In Greece, in recent years huge steps have been taken compared to the past and now a fairly strict legal framework has been adopted for the protection of animals (mainly companion animals) but also for the obligations of their owners. Nevertheless, animal abuse in Greece continues almost on a daily basis. To better understand the parameters that determine the human-animal relationship from an ethical point of view, an empirical study was conducted as part of an ongoing research investigating the perception and level of familiarity of university instructors on this topic. Research findings refer to four thematic categories: a) legal framework, b) animal rights-ethics, c) experimental animals, d) technology and animals and show that the academic background of the participants generally does not play a significant role in their answers.
Uk Must Not Relax Rules on Animal Studies to Harmonise with Europe, Scientists Say

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e1106

2012-01-01

British Medical Journal

Abstract:UK legislation on the use of animals in research should not be watered down to harmonise with the EU Animals Directive, scientists and research charities have urged. The Home Office will shortly announce its plans for bringing UK law into line with the directive, which sets standards that in many respects are less demanding than those already enforced in the United Kingdom. Animal welfare charities such as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) have warned that although the directive will raise standards in other parts of the EU it must not be allowed to lower those in the UK. Differences include a lower level of inspections than is presently the case in the UK and smaller cage sizes. But the directive …
Livestock, ethics, and quality of life

J Hodges

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2527/2003.81112887x

Abstract:Agricultural and animal scientists need to embrace a new vision beyond the single-minded existing pursuit of biological efficiency. The public in the West is no longer concerned solely with cheap food. Other paramount issues define quality of life, including: health and safety of foods; nutritional value; traditional, regional, locally produced, and organic foods; animal welfare; sustainable farming, environment, and rural resources. The paper provides examples of how the credibility of animal scientists has been lost due to some recent unethical behavior. Research, teaching and application of agricultural and animal science, especially of biotechnology, need to be reshaped into a new "Quality of Life Agricultural Era" to replace the "Era of Intensification." This new era will need fresh assumptions, beliefs and leadership to match the emerging social agenda of the 21st century. Animal scientists have a special role in implementing this new plausibility structure.
Animals in Moral Limbo: How Literary Pigs May Help Lab-Generated Ones

Nancy Tuck

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10040629

2020-04-06

Animals

Abstract:When considering that artistic and literary artifacts reflect the cultural views and mores of a particular time period, there is a significant misalignment between stories depicting increased moral status of pigs (e.g., vis-à-vis human-porcine relationships) and ongoing practices of pig consumption, commodification, and medical experimentation. In fact, there has been increased industrial farm meat production and biotechnological experimentation. Xenotransplantation trials, for example, are being heralded “the answer” to organ shortages needed for human transplantation, while significant ethical concerns persist. In this paper, I posit that literary reflections add a valuable dimension to animal ethics deliberations, providing a meta-narrative against which to assess normative practices. Beginning with synopses of three books: E.B. White’s Charlotte’s Web (1952), Robert Newton Peck’s A Day No Pigs Would Die (1972), and Paul Griffin’s Saving Marty (2017), I illustrate a shifting moral status view of human–pig relationships. Next, I discuss personhood attributions through biological, philosophical, and legal frameworks; review benefits and risks of xenotransplantation; reflect on the moral status of non-human animals; and offer concluding thoughts.

agriculture, dairy & animal science,veterinary sciences
Re-thinking public health: Towards a new scientific logic of routine animal health care in European industrial farming

Camille Bellet,Lindsay Hamilton,Jonathan Rushton

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00890-y

2021-09-20

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications

Abstract:Abstract This study makes the case for a new scientific logic of routine animal health care in industrial farming in Europe. We argue that the social regime underpinning scientific research and development on chronic animal disease management (CADM) in Europe stifles innovation and sustains a productivist model of animal husbandry that facilitates and maintains chronic animal diseases rather than eliminating them. Drawing on documentary analysis and qualitative interviews, the study explores the science of CADM in the broiler, cattle and pig sectors of the European food industry. Our findings show that in these major sectors, research and development on CADM is largely orientated towards a logic of growth, profitability and control rather than a recognition of the interconnection between chronic animal diseases, the food industry, and people (especially consumers) as advocated by the One Health approach. The study contributes to the literature on medical humanities and science and technology studies within One Health and public health in two ways: First, we draw new focus towards chronic animal diseases that are non-transmissible to humans and argue that while these are not zoonoses, they are equally worthy of attention for managing the emergence of new pathogens and diseases. Second, we expand the conceptualisation of One Health to include chronic animal health conditions. Our argument is that public health as an outcome of the One Health approach should be a term of reference that applies to humans and nonhumans alike whether they be farmed animals, practitioners or consumers.
Freedom in Captivity: Managing Zoo Animals According to the ‘Five Freedoms’

Nelly Mäekivi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-018-9311-5

2018-02-02

Biosemiotics

Abstract:Animal welfare is a complex matter that includes scientific, ethical, economic and other dimensions. Despite the existence of more comprehensive approaches to animal welfare and the obvious shortcomings of the ‘Five Freedoms’, for zoological gardens the freedoms still constitute the general guidelines to be followed. These guidelines reflect both, an ethical view and a science based approach. Analysis reveals that the potential ineptitude of the ‘Five Freedoms’ lies in the manifold perceptions that people have of other animals. These perceptions are biased by our own (mammalian) umwelt, which is intertwined with different cultural attitudes towards other species (e.g. humanistic, moralistic, ecologistic). Perceptions of animals may be held simultaneously by different interest groups and may often be incompatible, thus often making it difficult to follow the ‘Five Freedoms’ in practice. We aim to recognise and consider the multiplicity of factors that, besides animal subjectivity, are relevant in understanding this hybrid environment. The moral value and practical applicability of the ‘Five Freedoms’ are sometimes undermined by prioritising some freedoms over others and by species bias. Both are characteristic phenomena of the zoo as a hybrid environment where other species are managed by humans. Given deficiencies are further amplified by humanistic and moralistic attitudes that people hold.

history & philosophy of science
Discourses on Positive Animal Welfare by Sheep Farmers and Industry Actors: Implications for Science and Communication

Mukhtar Muhammad,Jessica Elizabeth Stokes,Louise Manning,Iona Yuelu Huang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci11100452

2024-09-24

Abstract:This research examines how sheep farmers and industry actors in the United Kingdom (UK) understand and conceptualize what animal welfare scientists term 'positive animal welfare'. It explores their awareness of the concept, and how they interpret it using a qualitative approach. Participants were recruited using a snowballing, purposive sample approach, resulting in 25 sheep farmers and 11 industry actors (veterinarians, farming organizations, advisors, and supply chain) being interviewed. To collect data, a combined approach involving semi-structured interviews and a facilitated workshop were used between April 2021 and March 2022. Data were then thematically analyzed using a hybrid of inductive and deductive coding process. The findings suggested that the perceptions of farmers and industry actors in the study regarding positive welfare differ from contemporary academic discourses. Overall, around 7 of the farmers equated positive welfare with "positive stockmanship", while six of them expressed "good animal welfare" definitions associated with the Five Freedoms. In contrast, most industry actors (6) expressed interpretations associated with high welfare standards (going above minimum recommended practices) and positive mental experiences (3). Emerging discourses revealed the link between self-identity, social identity and what positive welfare is, the importance of knowledge exchange, and the need for practical indicators through language rephrasing. There is a clear need to enhance and improve knowledge dissemination strategies, particularly in the UK, where much research is being conducted on positive animal welfare.
Positive Animal Welfare: Bridging the Gap or Raising Inequalities Worldwide?

Jean-Loup Rault,Peter Sandøe,Quixi Sonntag,Leopoldo Stuardo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fanim.2022.825379

2022-02-15

Frontiers in Animal Science

Abstract:Positive animal welfare (PAW) is a rising topic in animal welfare science, although its construct, definition, and operational approach remain debated. Despite this scientific uncertainty, there is societal interest to include more indicators of positive welfare in legislation, animal welfare assessment and accreditation schemes. Changes in some farming practices seem to be in line with promoting PAW (e.g., free-range housing), providing animals more opportunities for positive experiences such as rewarding natural behaviour, greater autonomy, or choice. Interestingly, some of the ideas underlying PAW are present in extensive production systems or low-input animal management practices that are common in low-income countries, for example free-roaming livestock or village dogs. Nevertheless, welfare challenges such as neglect, diseases, poor nutrition, animal abuse and other forms of suffering remain ubiquitous, especially where resources like veterinary support are limited. Living conditions for animals in low-income countries provide examples of the delicate balance between positive welfare and welfare risks relating to health and survival, with inextricable ethical dilemmas. In our view, the growing focus on PAW could stimulate a more balanced approach to animal welfare worldwide, promoting PAW while simultaneously limiting various forms of welfare challenges. However, this requires accounting for human factors such as societal and cultural location-specific aspects to find flexible solutions that also benefit and respect people whose livelihood may be at stake. Those human factors also modulate the consideration and importance of providing animals with positive welfare states and the role of underlying ethical concepts like happiness and “a good life.”
Updating Animal Welfare Thinking: Moving beyond the “Five Freedoms” towards “A Life Worth Living”

David J Mellor,David Mellor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6030021

2016-03-14

Animals

Abstract:The Five Freedoms have had major impact on animal welfare thinking internationally. However, despite clear initial statements that the words 'freedom from' should indicate 'as free as possible from', the Freedoms have come to be represented as absolute or fundamental freedoms, even rights, by some animal advocate and other groups. Moreover, a marked increase in scientific understanding over the last two decades shows that the Freedoms do not capture the more nuanced knowledge of the biological processes that is germane to understanding animal welfare and which is now available to guide its management. For example, the named negative experiences of thirst, hunger, discomfort and pain, and others identified subsequently, including breathlessness, nausea, dizziness, debility, weakness and sickness, can never be eliminated, merely temporarily neutralised. Each one is a genetically embedded element that motivates animals to behave in particular ways to obtain specific life-sustaining resources, avoid or reduce physical harm or facilitate recovery from infection or injury. Their undoubted negativity creates a necessary sense of urgency to respond, without which animals would not survive. Also, the temporary neutralisation of these survival-critical affects does not in and of itself generate positive experience. This questions the commonly held assumption that good animal welfare will result when these internally generated negative affects are minimised. Animals may also experience other negative affects that include anxiety, fear, panic, frustration, anger, helplessness, loneliness, boredom and depression. These situation-related affects reflect animals' perceptions of their external circumstances. Although they are elicited by threatening, cramped, barren and/or isolated conditions, they can often be replaced by positive affects when animals are kept with congenial others in spacious, stimulus-rich and safe environments which provide opportunities for them to engage in behaviours they find rewarding. These behaviours may include environment-focused exploration and food acquisition activities as well as animal-to-animal interactive activities, all of which can generate various forms of comfort, pleasure, interest, confidence and a sense of control. Animal welfare management should aim to reduce the intensity of survival-critical negative affects to tolerable levels that nevertheless still elicit the required behaviours, and should also provide opportunities for animals to behave in ways they find rewarding, noting that poor management of survival-critical affects reduces animals' motivation to utilize such rewarding opportunities. This biologically more accurate understanding provides support for reviewing the adequacy of provisions in current codes of welfare or practice in order to ensure that animals are given greater opportunities to experience positive welfare states. The purpose is to help animals to have lives worth living, which is not possible when the predominant focus of such codes is on survival-critical measures. Finally, an updated characterisation of animal welfare that incorporates this more accurate understanding is presented.

agriculture, dairy & animal science,veterinary sciences
Diary of a veterinary parliamentary intern: trade bills and animal welfare standards

Fiona Shuttleworth

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/vetr.4037

2024-03-02

Abstract:Vet and parliamentary intern to Lord Trees Fiona Shuttleworth discusses proposed implementation of trade partnerships and how animal welfare must be considered in both import and export agreements.
Pig Farming in Alternative Systems: Strengths and Challenges in Terms of Animal Welfare, Biosecurity, Animal Health and Pork Safety

Maxime Delsart,Françoise Pol,Barbara Dufour,Nicolas Rose,Christelle Fablet

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture10070261

2020-07-02

Agriculture

Abstract:In pig production, the widespread conventional indoor system with a slatted floor currently dominates. However, this production system is becoming less socially acceptable. In addition to general environmental protection issues, animal welfare, the absence of suffering and distress, and the management of pain also constitute societal concerns. In this context, alternative production systems are gaining ground. Although they are popular with consumers and other citizens, these alternative systems have their critical points. Here, we reviewed the international scientific literature to establish the state of the art of current knowledge regarding welfare, biosecurity, animal health and pork safety in this type of farming system. In general, alternative farms give pigs the opportunity to express a broader range of behaviours than conventional farms. However, the management of feeding, watering, temperature and predators is often more complicated in these outdoor systems. In addition, biosecurity measures seem to be applied less strictly in alternative farms than in conventional farms, especially in free-range systems, where they are more difficult to implement. On the other hand, pigs kept in these farming systems seem to be less affected by respiratory diseases, but parasitism and piglet crushing (in farrowing units) both remain a real challenge. Furthermore, the higher prevalence of many zoonotic pathogens in these farms may represent a risk for human health.

Animal farm

The Political World in Fiction——An Interpretation of George Orwell’s Animal Farm

The animal scientist in a changing society

Animal welfare: a complex domestic and international public-policy issue--who are the key players?

12. Intensive Animal Farming and Moral Status

Animal board invited review: Animal source foods in healthy, sustainable, and ethical diets - An argument against drastic limitation of livestock in the food system

Character Metaphors in George Orwell’s Animal Farm

Why Not Phase Out Animal Experimentation? Considering Objections from Freedom of Inquiry and Cross-Border Displacement

Palliative Farming

People and Their Animal Companions: Navigating Moral Constraints in a Harmful, Yet Meaningful World

Animal Rights in Greece: Legislation and Perceptions

Uk Must Not Relax Rules on Animal Studies to Harmonise with Europe, Scientists Say

Livestock, ethics, and quality of life

Animals in Moral Limbo: How Literary Pigs May Help Lab-Generated Ones

Re-thinking public health: Towards a new scientific logic of routine animal health care in European industrial farming

Freedom in Captivity: Managing Zoo Animals According to the ‘Five Freedoms’

Discourses on Positive Animal Welfare by Sheep Farmers and Industry Actors: Implications for Science and Communication

Positive Animal Welfare: Bridging the Gap or Raising Inequalities Worldwide?

Updating Animal Welfare Thinking: Moving beyond the “Five Freedoms” towards “A Life Worth Living”

Diary of a veterinary parliamentary intern: trade bills and animal welfare standards

Pig Farming in Alternative Systems: Strengths and Challenges in Terms of Animal Welfare, Biosecurity, Animal Health and Pork Safety