IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02929260.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Directly Valuing Animal Welfare in (Environmental) Economics

Author

Listed:
  • Alexis Carlier

    (TSE-R - Toulouse School of Economics - UT Capitole - Université Toulouse Capitole - UT - Université de Toulouse - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement)

  • Nicolas Treich

    (TSE-R - Toulouse School of Economics - UT Capitole - Université Toulouse Capitole - UT - Université de Toulouse - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - INRAE - Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement)

Abstract

Research in economics is anthropocentric. It only cares about the welfare of humans, and usually does not concern itself with animals. When it does, animals are treated as resources, biodiversity, or food. That is, animals only have instrumental value for humans. Yet unlike water, trees or vegetables, and like humans, most animals have a brain and a nervous system. They can feel pain and pleasure, and many argue that their welfare should matter. Some economic studies value animal welfare, but only indirectly through humans' altruistic valuation. This overall position of economics is inconsistent with the utilitarian tradition and can be qualified as speciesist. We suggest that economics should directly value the welfare of sentient animals, at least sometimes. We briefly discuss some possible implications and challenges for (environmental) economics.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexis Carlier & Nicolas Treich, 2020. "Directly Valuing Animal Welfare in (Environmental) Economics," Post-Print hal-02929260, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02929260
    DOI: 10.1561/101.00000115
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-02929260
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-02929260/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1561/101.00000115?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hestermann, Nina & Le Yaouanq, Yves & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "An economic model of the meat paradox," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    2. Robert L. Weaber & Jayson L. Lusk, 2010. "The Economic Value of Improvements in Beef Tenderness by Genetic Marker Selection," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1456-1471.
    3. Stavros D. Veresoglou & John M. Halley & Matthias C. Rillig, 2015. "Extinction risk of soil biota," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 6(1), pages 1-10, December.
    4. Kagel,John H. & Battalio,Raymond C. & Green,Leonard, 2007. "Economic Choice Theory," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521035927, September.
    5. Bartels, Daniel M., 2006. "Proportion dominance: The generality and variability of favoring relative savings over absolute savings," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 76-95, May.
    6. Giuseppe Nocella & Lionel Hubbard & Riccardo Scarpa, 2010. "Farm Animal Welfare, Consumer Willingness to Pay, and Trust: Results of a Cross-National Survey," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 32(2), pages 275-297.
    7. Mas-Colell, Andreu & Whinston, Michael D. & Green, Jerry R., 1995. "Microeconomic Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195102680.
    8. Amy W. Ando & Christian Langpap, 2018. "The Economics of Species Conservation," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 10(1), pages 445-467, October.
    9. Matthew Clarke & Yew-Kwang Ng, 2006. "Population Dynamics and Animal Welfare: Issues Raised by the Culling of Kangaroos in Puckapunyal," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 27(2), pages 407-422, October.
    10. Harald Grethe, 2017. "The Economics of Farm Animal Welfare," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 75-94, October.
    11. Michael Maloni & Michael Brown, 2006. "Corporate Social Responsibility in the Supply Chain: An Application in the Food Industry," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 35-52, September.
    12. Francesca de Petrillo & Martina Caroli & Emanuele Gori & Antonia Micucci & Serena Gastaldi & Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde & Elsa Addessi, 2019. "Evolutionary origins of money categorization and exchange: an experimental investigation in tufted capuchin monkeys (Sapajus spp.)," Post-Print hal-02952946, HAL.
    13. Jayson L. Lusk & F. Bailey Norwood & J. Ross Pruitt, 2006. "Consumer Demand for a Ban on Antibiotic Drug Use in Pork Production," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 1015-1033.
    14. Xabier Irigoien & T. A. Klevjer & A. Røstad & U. Martinez & G. Boyra & J. L. Acuña & A. Bode & F. Echevarria & J. I. Gonzalez-Gordillo & S. Hernandez-Leon & S. Agusti & D. L. Aksnes & C. M. Duarte & S, 2014. "Large mesopelagic fishes biomass and trophic efficiency in the open ocean," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 5(1), pages 1-10, May.
    15. Macmillan, Douglas C. & Philip, Lorna & Hanley, Nick & Alvarez-Farizo, Begona, 2002. "Valuing the non-market benefits of wild goose conservation: a comparison of interview and group based approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 49-59, November.
    16. B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), 2002. "Handbook of Agricultural Economics," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 2, number 4.
    17. Olson, Lars J., 2006. "The Economics of Terrestrial Invasive Species: A Review of the Literature," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 178-194, April.
    18. 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.
    19. Johansson-Stenman, Olof, 2018. "Animal Welfare and Social Decisions: Is It Time to Take Bentham Seriously?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 90-103.
    20. Anonymous, 1964. "Food and Agriculture Organization," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 168-172, January.
    21. B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), 2002. "Handbook of Agricultural Economics," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 2, number 3.
    22. 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.
    23. Raymond Battalio & Leonard Green & John Kagel, 1995. "Economic choice theory. an experimental analysis of animal behavior," Framed Field Experiments 00166, The Field Experiments Website.
    24. Norwood, F. Bailey & Lusk, Jayson L., 2011. "Compassion, by the Pound: The Economics of Farm Animal Welfare," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199551163.
    25. Gardner M. Brown & Jason F. Shogren, 1998. "Economics of the Endangered Species Act," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 3-20, Summer.
    26. Harald Grethe, 2017. "The Economics of Farm Animal Welfare," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 75-94, October.
    27. Georgia J. Mason & Jonathan Cooper & Catherine Clarebrough, 2001. "Frustrations of fur-farmed mink," Nature, Nature, vol. 410(6824), pages 35-36, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. 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).
    3. Blemings, Benjamin & Zhang, Peilu & Neill, Clinton L., 2023. "Where is the value? The impacts of sow gestation crate laws on pork supply and consumer value perceptions," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    4. Romain Espinosa & Damian Tago & Nicolas Treich, 2020. "Infectious Diseases and Meat Production," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(4), pages 1019-1044, August.
    5. 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.
    6. Amy W. Ando & Titus O. Awokuse & Nathan W. Chan & Jimena González-Ramírez & Sumeet Gulati & Matthew G. Interis & Sarah Jacobson & Dale T. Manning & Samuel Stolper, 2024. "Environmental and Natural Resource Economics and Systemic Racism," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(1), pages 143-164.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Espinosa, Romain & Treich, Nicolas, 2024. "Animal welfare as a public good," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    6. Romain Espinosa & Nicolas Treich, 2021. "Moderate Versus Radical NGOs†," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(4), pages 1478-1501, August.
    7. Espinosa, Romain & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "Moderate vs. Radical NGOs," TSE Working Papers 20-1159, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    8. Treich, Nicolas & Espinosa, Romain, 2024. "The Animal-Welfare Levy," TSE Working Papers 24-1503, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    9. 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).
    10. Mergenthaler, Marcus & Schröter, Iris, 2020. "Institutionelle Grenzen und Perspektiven bei der ökonomischen Bewertung und der Bereitstellung von Tierwohl," 60th Annual Conference, Halle/ Saale, Germany, September 23-25, 2020 305598, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    11. Pisani, E. & Franceschetti, G., 2011. "Da agrariedade á ruralidade: Novos enfoques á economia territorial [From agriculture to rurality: New approaches in territorial economics]," MPRA Paper 42806, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 20 May 2011.
    12. Brenna Ellison & Kathleen Brooks & Taro Mieno, 2017. "Which livestock production claims matter most to consumers?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 819-831, December.
    13. Mergenthaler, Marcus & Schröter, Iris, 2020. "Institutionelle Grenzen und Perspektiven bei der ökonomischen Bewertung und der Bereitstellung von Tierwohl," 60th Annual Conference, Halle/ Saale, Germany, September 23-25, 2020 305598, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    14. Martin C. Parlasca & Matin Qaim, 2022. "Meat Consumption and Sustainability," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 14(1), pages 17-41, October.
    15. 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.
    16. Douglas D. Davis & Edward L. Millner, 2005. "Rebates, Matches, and Consumer Behavior," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(2), pages 410-421, October.
    17. Ryckembusch, David & Frega, Romeo & Silva, Marcio Guilherme & Gentilini, Ugo & Sanogo, Issa & Grede, Nils & Brown, Lynn, 2013. "Enhancing Nutrition: A New Tool for Ex-Ante Comparison of Commodity-based Vouchers and Food Transfers," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 58-67.
    18. Gregory S. Amacher & Erkki Koskela & Markku Ollikainen, 2004. "Deforestation, Production Intensity and Land Use under Insecure Property Rights," CESifo Working Paper Series 1128, CESifo.
    19. Philippe Février & Michael Visser, 2004. "A Study of Consumer Behavior Using Laboratory Data," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 7(1), pages 93-114, February.
    20. Chandana Maitra & Sriram Shankar & D.S. Prasada Rao, 2016. "Income Poor or Calorie Poor? Who should get the Subsidy?," Discussion Papers Series 564, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Animal welfare; Environmental economics; Agricultural economics; Economic valuation; Speciesism; Ethics; Sentience; Effective altruism;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy
    • I30 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General
    • Z00 - Other Special Topics - - General - - - General

    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:hal:journl:hal-02929260. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.