CEU Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2018
| Author | Szigetiné Molnár, Mariann Zsófia |
|---|---|
| Title | "What is the right thing to do?" Perspectives on the "moral imperative" and the "ultimate goal" of farm animal welfare in Hungary |
| Summary | Animal welfare conditions in conventional livestock farming systems have seen major reforms over the last decades, yet studies indicate that many problems are still apparent. Due to the “conflicting” interests of humanity and farm animals however, current problem-solving efforts aim to slowly transition conventional livestock farming to more welfare-friendly systems. But studies also suggest important inconsistencies in the societal evaluation of welfare and consumer behaviours, and farmers are often blamed for using production methods that many oppose. These problems initiated theoretical disputes over “what the right thing to do” for livestock should be. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impacts of a fragmented livestock welfare reform effort. Using the Anderson (2011) model on how truly powerless groups such as children and animals gain societal protection, it has assessed important discrepancies between animal welfare reform principles and livestock farming practices. In particular, it aimed to identify the emerging features of a united “moral imperative” and “ultimate goal” for livestock welfare, and comprehend opportunities and threats that influence the livestock welfare reform effort. A Grounded Theory approach enabled the researcher to pursue a pluralist scientific perspective in which the socially constructed nature of “reality” was integrated with an understanding of the “lived realities” of animals. A qualitative research strategy provided data from in-depth semi-structured interviews with “experts”, “conventional farmers” and “alternative farmers” and observational data from conventional and alternative pig farms in Hungary. These data sets were comparatively assessed and captured many aspects of the livestock welfare problem which was “grounded” in empirical data. Results suggest that the majority of conventional and alternative farmers have a shared understanding of “ideal” livestock welfare conditions, which only alternative farmers are able to pursue. While “ideal” conditions are believed to provide good lives for animals, farmers thought that the “realistic” scenario was probable, in which only economically advantageous aspects of welfare are ensured. Farmers believe that conventional livestock farming is unable to transition to a system that ensures all aspects of welfare, not because farmers prioritise economic benefits over livestock welfare, but rather because they are constrained by major external pressures and conventional technologies. Data suggests that a successful livestock welfare reform will depend on extending current problem-solving approaches to incorporate “external” as well as “internal” aspects of agriculture that determine farming methods and livestock welfare conditions. Emerging features of the “moral imperative” and “ultimate goal” for farm animal welfare prioritize traditional “care principles” and aim to ensure good lives for animals in small-scale, low-intensity, near-natural farming systems. It did not call for non-interference rights for livestock, but rather enhanced and mutually beneficial human-human and human-animal interactions. The study suggests that this aim could only be achieved in situations where societal consensus and cooperation are ensured. To pursue a successful livestock welfare reform effort the contribution of conventional and alternative farmers is also essential. |
| Supervisor | Professor Alexios Antypas |
| Department | Environment Sciences and Policy PhD |
| Full text | https://www.etd.ceu.edu/2018/molnar_mariann.pdf |
Visit the CEU Library.
© 2007-2021, Central European University