The Intersectionality of Environmental Injustice, Other Societal Harms, and Farmed Animal Welfare

2Citations
Citations of this article
15Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

How we treat nonhuman animals (‘‘animals’’) not only reflects the morals and values of society, but our treatment also has enormous effects on society. Our actions toward farmed animals, in particular, cause immense suffering and devastating impact. Building upon a concurring opinion drafted by Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III of the Fourth Circuit, this article discusses the myriad environmental, animal welfare, and societal harms of factory farming. Addressing the underlying animal-rearing practices that breed these harms will abate many of them. Such practices include caging animals in spaces so small they cannot turn around, warehousing animals in structures with no outdoor access, collecting tons of gallons of animal waste and disposing of it in the surrounding environment, and slaughtering animals at such high rates and line speeds that food and worker safety are put on the line. These actions disregard animal welfare and have enormously harmful external environmental and societal consequences. Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) and people experiencing poverty are affected the most by each of the associated harms. These intersectional injuries demonstrate that farmed animal welfare is an integral component of environmental justice.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fox, L. (2024). The Intersectionality of Environmental Injustice, Other Societal Harms, and Farmed Animal Welfare. Environmental Justice, 17(2), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1089/env.2021.0125

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free