Animal welfare: At the interface between science and society

被引:158
作者
Ohl, F. [1 ,3 ]
van der Staay, F. J. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Utrecht, Fac Vet Med, Dept Anim Sci & Soc, NL-3508 TD Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Univ Utrecht, Fac Vet Med, Dept Farm Anim Hlth, Emot & Cognit Programme, NL-3584 CL Utrecht, Netherlands
[3] Rudolf Magnus Inst Neurosci, NL-3584 CG Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
Animal welfare; Adaptation; Natural behaviour; Society; Moral understanding; Ethics; Ethical consideration; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; ANXIETY; EVOLUTION; PERSPECTIVES; SELECTION; BEHAVIOR; NOVELTY; MODELS; ISSUES;
D O I
10.1016/j.tvjl.2011.05.019
中图分类号
S85 [动物医学(兽医学)];
学科分类号
0906 ;
摘要
The general concept of animal welfare embraces a continuum between negative/bad welfare and positive/good welfare. Early approaches to defining animal welfare were mainly based on the exclusion of negative states, neglecting the fact that during evolution animals optimised their ability to interact with and adapt to their environment(s). An animal's welfare status might best be represented by the adaptive value of the individual's interaction with a given environmental setting but this dynamic welfare concept has significant implications for practical welfare assessments. Animal welfare issues cannot simply be addressed by means of objective biological measurements of an animal's welfare status under certain circumstances. In practice, interpretation of welfare status and its translation into the active management of perceived welfare issues are both strongly influenced by context and, especially, by cultural and societal values. In assessing whether or not a given welfare status is morally acceptable, animal welfare scientists must be aware that scientifically based, operational definitions of animal welfare will necessarily be influenced strongly by a given society's moral understanding. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:13 / 19
页数:7
相关论文
共 57 条
[1]   In search of behavioral individuality [J].
Barash, DP .
HUMAN NATURE-AN INTERDISCIPLINARY BIOSOCIAL PERSPECTIVE, 1997, 8 (02) :153-169
[2]  
Barnard C. J., 1996, Animal Welfare, V5, P405
[3]   Animal Welfare: A Complex Domestic and International Public-Policy Issue-Who Are the Key Players? [J].
Bayvel, A. C. David ;
Cross, Nicki .
JOURNAL OF VETERINARY MEDICAL EDUCATION, 2010, 37 (01) :3-12
[4]   Ten ways to improve the quality of descriptions of whole-animal movement [J].
Benjamini, Yoav ;
Lipkind, Dina ;
Horev, Guy ;
Fonio, Ehud ;
Kafkafi, Neri ;
Golani, Ilan .
NEUROSCIENCE AND BIOBEHAVIORAL REVIEWS, 2010, 34 (08) :1351-1365
[5]  
Blokhuis H.J., 2008, Trends in Food Science Technology, V19, pS79, DOI DOI 10.1016/J.TIFS.2008.09.007
[6]  
Blumstein DT, 2010, ANIM WELFARE, V19, P151
[7]   Assessment of positive emotions in animals to improve their welfare [J].
Boissy, Alain ;
Manteuffel, Gerhard ;
Jensen, Margit Bak ;
Moe, Randi Oppennann ;
Spruijt, Berry ;
Keeling, Linda J. ;
Winckler, Christoph ;
Forkman, Bjoern ;
Dimitrov, Ivan ;
Langbein, Jan ;
Bakken, Morten ;
Veissier, Isabelle ;
Aubert, Amaud .
PHYSIOLOGY & BEHAVIOR, 2007, 92 (03) :375-397
[8]   Assessing the importance of natural behavior for animal welfare [J].
Bracke, MBM ;
Hopster, H .
JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL & ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS, 2006, 19 (01) :77-89
[9]  
Bracke MBM, 1999, NETH J AGR SCI, V47, P307
[10]  
BRAMBELL COMMITTEE, 1965, REP TECHN COMM ENQ W