Welfare biology

Last updated
Within Ng's framework of welfare biology, beings such as kangaroos who have the capacity for perception and ability to experience pleasure or pain, are classified as "affective sentients" Forrester-Kangaroo-mob.jpg
Within Ng's framework of welfare biology, beings such as kangaroos who have the capacity for perception and ability to experience pleasure or pain, are classified as "affective sentients"

Welfare biology is a proposed cross-disciplinary field of research to study the positive and negative well-being of sentient individuals in relation to their environment. Yew-Kwang Ng first advanced the field in 1995. Since then, its establishment has been advocated for by a number of writers, including philosophers, who have argued for the importance of creating the research field, particularly in relation to wild animal suffering. Some researchers have put forward examples of existing research that welfare biology could draw upon and suggested specific applications for the research's findings.

Contents

History

Welfare biology was first proposed by the welfare economist Yew-Kwang Ng, in his 1995 paper "Towards welfare biology: Evolutionary economics of animal consciousness and suffering". In the paper, Ng defines welfare biology as the "study of living things and their environment with respect to their welfare (defined as net happiness, or enjoyment minus suffering)." He also distinguishes between "affective" and "non-affective" sentients, affective sentients being individuals with the capacity for perceiving the external world and experiencing pleasure or pain, while non-affective sentients have the capacity for perception, with no corresponding experience; Ng argues that because the latter experience no pleasure or suffering, "[t]heir welfare is necessarily zero, just like nonsentients". He concludes, based on his modelling of evolutionary dynamics, that suffering dominates enjoyment in nature. [1]

Matthew Clarke and Ng, in 2006, used Ng's welfare biology framework to analyse the costs, benefits and welfare implications of the culling of kangaroos—classified as affective sentients—in Puckapunyal, Australia. They concluded that while their discussion "may give some support to the culling of kangaroos or other animals in certain circumstances, a more preventive measure may be superior to the resort to culling". [2] In the same year, Thomas Eichner and Rüdiger Pethi analyzed Ng's model, raising concern regarding a lack of appropriate determinants of the welfare of organisms because of the infancy of welfare biology. [3]

In 2016, Ng argued that welfare biology could help resolve the paradox within animal welfare science, first raised by Marian Dawkins, on the difficulty of studying animal feelings, by answering "difficult questions regarding animal welfare"; in the paper, Ng also offered various practical proposals for improving the welfare of captive animals. [4] Todd K. Shackelford and Sayma H. Chowdhury, in response to Ng, argued that rather than focusing on improving the welfare of captive animals, that it would be better to not breed them in the first place, as this would "eliminate their suffering altogether". [5]

Ng published an update to his original 1995 paper, with Zach Groff, in 2019, which found an error in his original model, leading to a negation of the original conclusion and a revised conception of the extent of suffering in nature as less pessimistic. [6]

A chapter on welfare biology by the moral philosophers Catia Faria and Oscar Horta is included in the 2019 book The Routledge Handbook of Animal Ethics. In the chapter, they argue that welfare biology could be partially developed from animal welfare science, but its focus would be broader because it wouldn't only focus on studying animals under human control. Faria and Horta also assert that welfare biology could be developed from ecology, with a focus on how the well-being of sentient individuals is affected by their environments. They raise a concern of what they see as the minimization of the importance of animal well-being, caused by widespread speciesist and environmentalist beliefs among life scientists and the general public, which they argue could hamper the development of welfare biology. Faria and Horta conclude that the "expected value of developing welfare biology is extremely high" because of the massive extent of animal suffering in the wild, which refutes commonly conceived idyllic conceptions of nature. [7]

Some researchers have emphasised the importance of life history theory to welfare biology, as they argue certain traits of life history may predispose certain individuals to worse welfare outcomes and that this has a strong relationship with habitat fragmentation sensitivity. [8] It has also been suggested that while welfare biology, as a field in its infancy, lacks sufficient empirical studies on the welfare of wild animals, it can make up for this through the use of existing demographic data, currently used to inform biodiversity conservation, to inform future research efforts. [9] Reviewing the welfare implications of fire on wild animals has been cited as an example of using knowledge drawn from existing ecology studies to establish the field of welfare biology and identify future directions of research. [10] The application of welfare biology to rewilding projects has additionally been a subject of investigation, with "collaboration between local people, conservationists, authorities and policymakers" suggested as a means of establishing welfare biology as a discipline. [11]

Researchers in environmental economics have drawn attention to Ng's claim in his original paper that the "time is ripe for the recognition of welfare biology as a valid field of scientific study", yet after 25 years, welfare biology as a field of research has yet to take off. [12]

Animal Ethics and Wild Animal Initiative are two organizations working on promoting the establishment of welfare biology as a field of research. [13]

Proposed subdisciplines

Urban welfare ecology

Urban welfare ecology has been proposed as a subdiscipline to study the welfare of animals in urban environments, such as feral pigeons Feral pigeon (Columba livia domestica), 2017-05-27.jpg
Urban welfare ecology has been proposed as a subdiscipline to study the welfare of animals in urban environments, such as feral pigeons

Catia Faria and Oscar Horta have proposed urban welfare ecology as a subdiscipline of welfare biology, which would study the well-being of animals living in urban, suburban and industrial ecosystems. They suggest that much research has already been carried out on animals in these areas, but with the intention of eliminating their negative impact on humans, or to conserve animals of particular species. Faria and Horta argue that such knowledge can be applied to help mitigate the harms that these animals experience and that such environments are perfect for intervention experiments because such ecosystems are already greatly under human control and that the findings could be applied to improve the assessments of the well-being of animals in other ecosystems. [7]

Relation to wild animal suffering

Some writers in the field of animal ethics have argued that there are compelling moral reasons to reduce the suffering of sentient individuals and that following this line of reasoning, humans should undertake interventions to reduce the suffering of wild animals; [14] [15] they claim that because ecosystems are not sentient, that they consequently lack the capacity to care about biodiversity, while arguing that sentient animals do have interests in their welfare. [16] As a result, they argue that there are strong justifications for ecologists to shift their resources currently used for conservation biology, to welfare biology. [16] [17] It has also been asserted that if one is to accept an obligation to undertake systematic and large-scale efforts to help wild animals, that this would first require several important questions to be answered and that large-scale actions should only be carried out after a long phase of successful small-scale trials. [18]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Speciesism</span> Special consideration to individuals solely on the basis of their species membership

Speciesism is a term used in philosophy regarding the treatment of individuals of different species. The term has several different definitions within the relevant literature. Some sources specifically define speciesism as discrimination or unjustified treatment based on an individual's species membership, while other sources define it as differential treatment without regard to whether the treatment is justified or not. Richard Ryder, who coined the term, defined it as "a prejudice or attitude of bias in favour of the interests of members of one's own species and against those of members of other species." Speciesism results in the belief that humans have the right to use non-human animals, which scholars say is pervasive in the modern society. Studies from 2015 and 2019 suggest that people who support animal exploitation also tend to endorse racist, sexist, and other prejudicial views, which furthers the beliefs in human supremacy and group dominance to justify systems of inequality and oppression.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wildlife</span> Undomesticated organisms that grow or live wild in an area without being introduced by humans

Wildlife refers to undomesticated animal species, but has come to include all organisms that grow or live wild in an area without being introduced by humans. Wildlife was also synonymous to game: those birds and mammals that were hunted for sport. Wildlife can be found in all ecosystems. Deserts, plains, grasslands, woodlands, forests, and other areas, including the most developed urban areas, all have distinct forms of wildlife. While the term in popular culture usually refers to animals that are untouched by human factors, most scientists agree that much wildlife is affected by human activities. Some wildlife threaten human safety, health, property, and quality of life. However, many wild animals, even the dangerous ones, have value to human beings. This value might be economic, educational, or emotional in nature.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sentience</span> Ability to be aware of feelings and sensations

Sentience is the ability to experience feelings and sensations. The word was first coined by philosophers in the 1630s for the concept of an ability to feel, derived from Latin sentiens (feeling), to distinguish it from the ability to think (reason). In modern Western philosophy, sentience is the ability to experience sensations. In different Asian religions, the word "sentience" has been used to translate a variety of concepts. In science fiction, the word "sentience" is sometimes used interchangeably with "sapience", "self-awareness", or "consciousness".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Animal welfare</span> Well-being of non-human animals

Animal welfare is the well-being of non-human animals. Formal standards of animal welfare vary between contexts, but are debated mostly by animal welfare groups, legislators, and academics. Animal welfare science uses measures such as longevity, disease, immunosuppression, behavior, physiology, and reproduction, although there is debate about which of these best indicate animal welfare.

Moral agency is an individual's ability to make moral choices based on some notion of right and wrong and to be held accountable for these actions. A moral agent is "a being who is capable of acting with reference to right and wrong."

Yew-Kwang Ng is a Malaysian-Australian economist, who is currently Special Chair Professor of Economics at Fudan University, Shanghai, and a Distinguished Fellow of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia. He has published in a variety of academic disciplines and is best known for his work in welfare economics.

Animal ethics is a branch of ethics which examines human-animal relationships, the moral consideration of animals and how nonhuman animals ought to be treated. The subject matter includes animal rights, animal welfare, animal law, speciesism, animal cognition, wildlife conservation, wild animal suffering, the moral status of nonhuman animals, the concept of nonhuman personhood, human exceptionalism, the history of animal use, and theories of justice. Several different theoretical approaches have been proposed to examine this field, in accordance with the different theories currently defended in moral and political philosophy. There is no theory which is completely accepted due to the differing understandings of what is meant by the term ethics; however, there are theories that are more widely accepted by society such as animal rights and utilitarianism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pain in fish</span> Overview about the pain in fish

Fish fulfill several criteria proposed as indicating that non-human animals may experience pain. These fulfilled criteria include a suitable nervous system and sensory receptors, opioid receptors and reduced responses to noxious stimuli when given analgesics and local anaesthetics, physiological changes to noxious stimuli, displaying protective motor reactions, exhibiting avoidance learning and making trade-offs between noxious stimulus avoidance and other motivational requirements.

Animal suicide is when an animal intentionally ends its own life through its actions. It implies a wide range of higher cognitive capacities that experts have been wary to ascribe to nonhuman animals such as a concept of self, death, and future intention. There is currently not enough empirical data on the subject for there to be a consensus among experts. For these reasons, the occurrence of animal suicide is controversial among academics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wild animal suffering</span> Suffering experienced by animals living outside direct human control

Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals, as well as psychological stress. Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence. An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Oscar Horta</span> Spanish animal activist and moral philosopher

Óscar Horta Álvarez is a Spanish animal activist and moral philosopher who is currently a professor in the Department of Philosophy and Anthropology at the University of Santiago de Compostela (USC) and one of the co-founders of the organization Animal Ethics. He is known for his work in animal ethics, especially around the problem of wild animal suffering. He has also worked on the concept of speciesism and on the clarification of the arguments for the moral consideration of nonhuman animals. In 2022, Horta published his first book in English, Making a Stand for Animals.

Animal Ethics is a nonprofit organization formed to promote discussion and debate around issues in animal ethics and to provide information and resources for animal advocates. They also do outreach work in several countries on the issue of speciesism. Their aim is to create a world where moral consideration is extended to all sentient beings. The organization's website covers topics such as speciesism, sentience, veganism and wild animal suffering and has content translated into several languages.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Relationship between animal ethics and environmental ethics</span>

The relationship between animal ethics and environmental ethics concerns the differing ethical consideration of individual nonhuman animals—particularly those living in spaces outside of direct human control—and conceptual entities such as species, populations and ecosystems. The intersection of these two fields is a prominent component of vegan discourse.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ethics of uncertain sentience</span> Applied ethics issue

The ethics of uncertain sentience refers to questions surrounding the treatment of and moral obligations towards individuals whose sentience—the capacity to subjectively sense and feel—and resulting ability to experience pain is uncertain; the topic has been particularly discussed within the field of animal ethics, with the precautionary principle frequently invoked in response.

Catia Faria is a Portuguese moral philosopher and activist for animal rights and feminism. She is assistant professor in Applied Ethics at the Complutense University of Madrid, and is a board member of the UPF-Centre for Animal Ethics. Faria specialises in normative and applied ethics, especially focusing on how they apply to the moral consideration of non-human animals. In 2022, she published her first book, Animal Ethics in the Wild: Wild Animal Suffering and Intervention in Nature.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Insects in ethics</span> Ethical positions concerning insects

Insects and human ethical obligations towards them have been discussed by a number of writers and figures throughout history, many of whom, arguing from a variety of different perspectives, have contended that there exists a moral obligation towards not harming or killing insects. According to generally accepted definitions in animal welfare and agricultural ethics, however, it is argued that individual insects do not have a "right to life".

<i>Wild Animal Ethics</i> Book about wild animal suffering and ethics

Wild Animal Ethics: The Moral and Political Problem of Wild Animal Suffering is a 2020 book by the philosopher Kyle Johannsen, that examines whether humans, from a deontological perspective, have a duty to reduce wild animal suffering. He concludes that such a duty exists and recommends effective interventions that could be potentially undertaken to help these sentient individuals.

Octopus bocki is a species of Octopus, which has been located near south Pacific islands such as Fiji, the Philippines, and Moorea and can be found hiding in coral rubble. They can also be referred to as the Bock's pygmy octopus. They are nocturnal and use camouflage as their primary defense against predators as well as to ambush their prey. Their typical prey are crustaceans, crabs, shrimp, and small fish and they can grow to be up to 10cm in size.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jonathan Birch (philosopher)</span> British philosopher

Jonathan Birch is a British philosopher who is an Associate Professor in the Department of Philosophy Logic and Scientific Method at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His work addresses the philosophy of biology, especially questions around the evolution of social behavior and social norms, animal sentience, and animal welfare.

<i>Animal Ethics in the Wild</i> Book about wild animal suffering and ethics

Animal Ethics in the Wild: Wild Animal Suffering and Intervention in Nature is a 2022 book by the philosopher Catia Faria published by Cambridge University Press. It examines wild animal suffering as a moral problem. Faria contends that if we have a moral obligation to aid those in need, we should intervene in nature to prevent or alleviate the suffering of wild animals, as long as it is practical and leads to a net positive outcome.

References

  1. Ng, Yew-Kwang (1995-07-01). "Towards welfare biology: Evolutionary economics of animal consciousness and suffering" (PDF). Biology and Philosophy. 10 (3): 255–285. doi:10.1007/BF00852469. ISSN   1572-8404. S2CID   59407458.
  2. Clarke, Matthew; Ng, Yew-Kwang (2006-10-01). "Population Dynamics and Animal Welfare: Issues Raised by the Culling of Kangaroos in Puckapunyal" (PDF). Social Choice and Welfare. 27 (2): 407–422. doi:10.1007/s00355-006-0137-8. ISSN   1432-217X. S2CID   15023392.
  3. Eichner, Thomas; Pethig, Rüdiger (January 2006). "Efficient nonanthropocentric nature protection" (PDF). Social Choice and Welfare. 26 (1): 47–74. doi:10.1007/s00355-005-0029-3. ISSN   0176-1714. JSTOR   41106720. S2CID   20637480.
  4. Ng, Yew-Kwang (2016-01-01). "How welfare biology and commonsense may help to reduce animal suffering". Animal Sentience. 1 (7). doi: 10.51291/2377-7478.1012 . ISSN   2377-7478. S2CID   56046338.
  5. Chowdhury, Sayma H.; Shackelford, Todd K. (December 2017). "To Breed or Not to Breed?: an Antinatalist Answer to the Question of Animal Welfare" (PDF). Evolutionary Psychological Science. 3 (4): 390–391. doi:10.1007/s40806-017-0100-1. ISSN   2198-9885. S2CID   151484048.
  6. Groff, Zach; Ng, Yew-Kwang (2019-06-18). "Does suffering dominate enjoyment in the animal kingdom? An update to welfare biology". Biology & Philosophy. 34 (4): 40. doi:10.1007/s10539-019-9692-0. ISSN   1572-8404. S2CID   196683974.
  7. 1 2 Faria, Catia; Horta, Oscar (2019). "Welfare Biology". In Fischer, Bob (ed.). The Routledge Handbook of Animal Ethics. New York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315105840-41. ISBN   978-1-315-10584-0. S2CID   241043958.
  8. Hecht, Luke; Allcock, Matthew (2020-06-18). "Potential effects of habitat fragmentation on wild animal welfare". EcoEvoRxiv Preprints. doi:10.32942/osf.io/hb7nm. S2CID   243557708 . Retrieved 2020-07-28.
  9. Hecht, Luke B.B. (2019-10-28). "Accounting for demography in the assessment of wild animal welfare". bioRxiv   10.1101/819565 .
  10. Gutierrez, Jara; Miguel, Javier de (2020-08-28). "Fires in Nature: A Review of the Challenges for Wild Animals". Preprints.
  11. Bernard, Laura (2020-04-30). From Theory to Practice: the Implementation of Welfare Biology in Rewilding. A Cognitive Framing Perspective (Master's thesis). Radboud University.
  12. Carlier, Alexis; Treich, Nicolas (2020-04-07). "Directly Valuing Animal Welfare in (Environmental) Economics" (PDF). International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics. 14 (1): 113–152. doi:10.1561/101.00000115. S2CID   216460569.
  13. Matthews, Dylan (2021-04-12). "The wild frontier of animal welfare". Vox. Retrieved 2021-09-05.
  14. Paez, Eze (2020-01-01). "Preserving nature for the benefit of all sentient individuals". Animal Sentience. 4 (27). doi: 10.51291/2377-7478.1551 . hdl: 10230/57029 . ISSN   2377-7478. S2CID   213302969.
  15. Moen, Ole Martin (2016-05-09). "The ethics of wild animal suffering". Etikk I Praksis - Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics. 10 (1): 91–104. doi: 10.5324/eip.v10i1.1972 . ISSN   1890-4009.
  16. 1 2 Bruers, Stijn (2016-03-01). "Animal suffering and human bias". Animal Sentience. 1 (7). doi: 10.51291/2377-7478.1087 . ISSN   2377-7478.
  17. Ryf, Philipp (2016-09-01). Environmental Ethics: The Case of Wild Animals (Master's thesis). University of Basel.
  18. Mannino, Adriano (2015-05-11). "Humanitarian Intervention in Nature: Crucial Questions and Probable Answers". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (1): 107–118. ISSN   2280-9643.

Further reading