Human-Animal Relations in Three Cultures
It is quite clear that there is a strong link between animal welfare and overall efficiency in the production chain and that public concerns about ethics of production have an important role in modern animal husbandry (Szűcs, 1999; Szűcs et al., 2006). Animal welfare has become a growing factor affecting acceptability of agricultural systems in many countries around the world (Broom, 2001, 2010). The public view is that the meaning of: dominion over animals is responsibility for animal welfare, including minimizing pain, stress, suffering, and deprivation while providing for needs (Broom, 2003). The general public, livestock producers and research scientists have shown an increasing interest in assuring proper animal care in the production chain. There is a corresponding increase in efforts by research and educational institutions, government agencies, enterprises, health care organizations and others in developing and accessing information that assists in creating appropriate housing environments, management procedures and humane conditions for the production of foods of animal origin.
Since the interactions evoke tensions and ambiguous roles, they may shed light on how we categorize and ascribe meaning to various actors, relationships, and social spheres. Emotional work illustrates this, as well as the breaking up of the epithets ‘horse’ or ‘guest’ into specific individuals, addressed by their personal names. Therefore, by breaking up dyadic categories, and focusing on triads in specific contexts, the roles become more complex, highlighting new forms of power relationships, ambiguities, tensions, and contradictory views in the human-animal relationship.
Broom DM. Animal welfare: an aspect of care, sustainability, and food quality required by the public. J Vet Med Educ. 2010;37:83–88
Linzey A. ‘Speciesism’ In: Barry Clarke P, Linzey A, editors. Dictionary of Ethics. Theology and Society. Routledge; London - New York: 1996.
Mill JS. Longman. Utilitarianism. London, UK: 1863.
Naconecy CM. EDIPUCRS. Ética e Animais: um Guia de rgumentação Filosófica. Porto Alegre, Brazil: 2006.
Szűcs E. Gondolatok az állatitermék-előállítás néhány etikai, etológiai kérdéséhez (Considerations to ethics and ethology of animal production). Á llattenyésztés és Takarmányozás (Hungarian Journal of Animal Production) Herceghalom. 1999;48:541–552.