Currently, there is no non-anthropocentric guide to the practice of nature conservation and the treatment of invasive species and domestic animals. In examining the so-called ‘ecocentric’ and ‘animal’ ethics, we highlight some differences between them, and argue that the basic aspiration for support of all nonhuman life needs to be retained. We maintain that hierarchies of value need to be flexible, establishing basic principles and then weighing up the options in the context of anthropocentrism, industrial development and human population growth. Acknowledging the role of these conditions creates space for combining individual-based and collective-based ethics in practice.
CITATION STYLE
Kopnina, H., Gray, J., Lynn, W., Heister, A., & Srivastava, R. (2023). Uniting Ecocentric and Animal Ethics: Combining Non-Anthropocentric Approaches in Conservation and the Care of Domestic Animals. Ethics, Policy and Environment, 26(2), 265–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2022.2127295
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.