Animal welfare in relation to human welfare and sustainability – a review paper

Abstract

What should we change in the future? As a consequence of the one health, one welfare and one biology concepts, for most of our decisions we should be less human-centred if we want our species and other species to survive. Humans are less special than many people think. People consider that we have moral obligations to the animals that we use and to the sustainability of systems. A system or procedure is sustainable if it is acceptable now and if its expected future effects are acceptable, in particular in relation to resource availability, the consequences of functioning and morality of action. Consumers may refuse to buy unacceptable products and pressurise retail companies and governments to ensure that they are not sold. Poor welfare of people, poor welfare of other animals, genetic modification, or harmful environmental effects may make systems unsustainable. Most of the public now think of farm and companion animals as sentient beings and have concerns about their welfare. There are many components of sustainability and all should be evaluated and scored. Examples of attempts to do this are life cycle analysis and evaluation of externalities for agricultural or other products. Some topics considered include: straw use; which animals to keep as pets; stray dogs; free-roaming cats; feedlots; silvopastoral systems; free-range cattle; preserving land for hunting; land-sparing or land-sharing; zoos and conservation; and cell-culture of meat.