IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uhgewp/347466.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Animal Welfare In Non-Anthropocentric Cost-Benefit Analysis And Social Welfare Functions: A Critical Review To Guide Practical Application

Author

Listed:
  • Dusel, Sara
  • Wieck, Christine

Abstract

Cost-benefit analysis and social welfare functions are two closely related methods to evaluate impacts of policies on humans (producers, consumers etc.) and animals. In cost-benefit analysis, the impacts on animals are currently either disclosed as intangible impacts or monetised from the human (anthropocentric) perspective through production costs, revenues and willingness to pay. Social welfare functions are more flexible to aggregate and trade-off impacts on animals, but they are not yet applied in practice. In the literature, advances have been made to monetise policy impacts from the animals’ (non-anthropocentric) perspective and to include animals in social welfare functions. Yet, policy analysts who seek to implement any of these approaches in practice face substantial challenges because the available studies differ considerably in the methodologies and underlying normative assumptions. We conduct a critical review of the scientific and grey literature with the aim to synthesise the available material, to facilitate an informed debate on conflicting normative assumptions, and to eventually guide the practical application of non-anthropocentric cost-benefit analysis and social welfare functions. The results of the critical review are presented in the form of a checklist that allows to better comprehend key steps of the methodologies. Step-by-step, the checklist gives an overview of the alternative options and normative assumptions in the literature, and points to any remaining research gaps. Beside the academic debate, this is relevant for practical policy analysts who need to make methodological choices for their policy questions at hand.

Suggested Citation

  • Dusel, Sara & Wieck, Christine, 2024. "Animal Welfare In Non-Anthropocentric Cost-Benefit Analysis And Social Welfare Functions: A Critical Review To Guide Practical Application," Working Papers 347466, Universitaet Hohenheim, Institute of Agricultural Policy and Agricultural Markets.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:uhgewp:347466
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.347466
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/347466/files/HHA_42.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.347466?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Linda Ryen & Mikael Svensson, 2015. "The Willingness to Pay for a Quality Adjusted Life Year: A Review of the Empirical Literature," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(10), pages 1289-1301, October.
    2. Jill N. Fernandes & Paul H. Hemsworth & Grahame J. Coleman & Alan J. Tilbrook, 2021. "Costs and Benefits of Improving Farm Animal Welfare," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-14, January.
    3. Arrhenius, Gustaf, 2000. "An Impossibility Theorem for Welfarist Axiologies," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 247-266, October.
    4. Blackorby, Charles & Donaldson, David, 1992. "Pigs and Guinea Pigs: A Note on the Ethics of Animal Exploitation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(415), pages 1345-1369, November.
    5. Mark Budolfson & Romain Espinosa & Bob Fischer & Nicolas Treich, 2024. "Monetizing Animal Welfare Impacts for Benefit–Cost Analysis," Post-Print hal-04645320, HAL.
    6. Yew-Kwang Ng, 1999. "Utility, informed preference, or happiness: Following Harsanyi's argument to its logical conclusion," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 16(2), pages 197-216.
    7. Jayson L. Lusk & F. Bailey Norwood, 2012. "Speciesism, altruism and the economics of animal welfare," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 39(2), pages 189-212, April.
    8. Andrew G. Keeler, 2016. "A Modest Proposal For The Extension Of Nonmarket Valuation Methods," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(1), pages 719-724, January.
    9. Marc Fleurbaey & Martin Van der Linden, 2021. "Fair Social Ordering, Egalitarianism, and Animal Welfare," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(4), pages 466-491, November.
    10. Stijn Bruers, 2023. "The animal welfare cost of meat: evidence from a survey of hypothetical scenarios among Belgian consumers," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 324-341, July.
    11. Nicolas Treich, 2022. "The Dasgupta Review and the Problem of Anthropocentrism," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(4), pages 973-997, December.
    12. Clark, Beth & Stewart, Gavin B. & Panzone, Luca A. & Kyriazakis, Ilias & Frewer, Lynn J., 2017. "Citizens, consumers and farm animal welfare: A meta-analysis of willingness-to-pay studies," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 112-127.
    13. Romain Espinosa & Nicolas Treich, 2021. "Animal welfare: antispeciesism, veganism and a “life worth living”," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(3), pages 531-548, April.
    14. Norwood, F. Bailey & Lusk, Jayson L., 2011. "Compassion, by the Pound: The Economics of Farm Animal Welfare," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199551163.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Romain Espinosa & Nicolas Treich, 2024. "Beyond anthropocentrism in agricultural and resource economics," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 68(3), pages 541-566, July.
    2. Espinosa, Romain & Treich, Nicolas, 2024. "Animal welfare as a public good," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    3. Romain Espinosa & Nicolas Treich, 2021. "Moderate Versus Radical NGOs†," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(4), pages 1478-1501, August.
    4. Espinosa, Romain & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "Moderate vs. Radical NGOs," TSE Working Papers 20-1159, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    5. Treich, Nicolas & Espinosa, Romain, 2024. "The Animal-Welfare Levy," TSE Working Papers 24-1503, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    6. Charles Blackorby & Walter Bossert & David Donaldson, 2003. "The Axiomatic Approach to Population Ethics," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 2(3), pages 342-381, October.
    7. Bonnet, Céline & Bouamra-Mechemache, Zohra & Réquillart, Vincent & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "Viewpoint: Regulating meat consumption to improve health, the environment and animal welfare," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    8. Mark Budolfson & Romain Espinosa & Bob Fischer & Nicolas Treich, 2024. "Monetizing Animal Welfare Impacts for Benefit–Cost Analysis," Post-Print hal-04645320, HAL.
    9. Carlier, Alexis & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "Directly Valuing Animal Welfare in (Environmental) Economics," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 14(1), pages 113-152, April.
    10. Christian Tarsney & Teruji Thomas, 2020. "Non-Additive Axiologies in Large Worlds," Papers 2010.06842, arXiv.org.
    11. Funke, Franziska & Mattauch, Linus & van den Bijgaart, Inge & Godfray, Charles & Hepburn, Cameron & Klenert, David & Springmann, Marco & Treich, Nicholas, 2021. "Is Meat Too Cheap? Towards Optimal Meat Taxation," INET Oxford Working Papers 2021-08, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    12. Ufer, Danielle, 2022. "State Policies for Farm Animal Welfare in Production Practices of U.S. Livestock and Poultry Industries: An Overview," USDA Miscellaneous 333544, United States Department of Agriculture.
    13. Donaldson, David & Pendakur, Krishna, 2015. "Applications of Population Principles: A Note," Economics working papers david_donaldson-2015-22, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 03 Sep 2015.
    14. Nicolas Treich, 2022. "The Dasgupta Review and the Problem of Anthropocentrism," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(4), pages 973-997, December.
    15. Marc Fleurbaey & Christy Leppanen, 2021. "Toward a theory of ecosystem well-being," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 257-295, October.
    16. Franziska Funke & Linus Mattauch & Inge van den Bijgaart & H. Charles J. Godfray & Cameron Hepburn & David Klenert & Marco Springmann & Nicolas Treich, 2022. "Toward Optimal Meat Pricing: Is It Time to Tax Meat Consumption?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(2), pages 219-240.
    17. Kitano, Shinichi & Mitsunari, Yuka & Yoshino, Akira, 2022. "The impact of information asymmetry on animal welfare-friendly consumption: Evidence from milk market in Japan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    18. repec:vuw:vuwscr:19118 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Fischer, Barbara & Telser, Harry & Zweifel, Peter & von Wyl, Viktor & Beck, Konstantin & Weber, Andreas, 2023. "The value of a QALY towards the end of life and its determinants: Experimental evidence," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 326(C).
    20. Prinz, Aloys & Bünger, Björn, 2009. "From full life to balanced life: Extending Martin Seligman's route to happiness," CAWM Discussion Papers 17, University of Münster, Münster Center for Economic Policy (MEP).
    21. Jayson Lusk, 2011. "The market for animal welfare," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(4), pages 561-575, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:uhgewp:347466. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwhohde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.