IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04645320.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Monetizing Animal Welfare Impacts for Benefit–Cost Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Mark Budolfson

    (University of Texas at Austin [Austin])

  • Romain Espinosa

    (CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, CIRED - Centre International de Recherche sur l'Environnement et le Développement - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - AgroParisTech - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech - Université Paris-Saclay - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Bob Fischer

    (Texas State University and Rethink Priorities)

  • 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

Animal welfare is often ignored in decision-making, despite widespread agreement about its importance. This is partly because of a lack of quantitative methods to assess the impacts of policies on humans and nonhumans alike on a common scale. At the same time, recent work in economics, philosophy, and animal welfare science has made progress on the fundamental theoretical challenge of estimating the well-being potential of different species on a single scale. By combining these estimates of each species' well-being potential with assessments of how various policies impact the quality of life for these species, along with the number of animals affected, we can arrive at a framework for estimating the impact of policies on animal health and well-being. This framework allows for a quantifiable comparison between policies affecting humans and animals. For instance, it enables us to compare human QALYs to animal QALYs tailored to specific species. Hence, the intrinsic value of animal welfare impacts of policies can be monetized on the same scale as market and non-market impact for humans, facilitating benefit–cost analysis. Many challenges remain though, including issues of population ethics, political feasibility, and new complexities in addressing equity and uncertainty.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark Budolfson & Romain Espinosa & Bob Fischer & Nicolas Treich, 2024. "Monetizing Animal Welfare Impacts for Benefit–Cost Analysis," Post-Print hal-04645320, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04645320
    DOI: 10.1017/bca.2024.19
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-04645320v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-04645320v1/document
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1017/bca.2024.19?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. Bleichrodt, Han & Quiggin, John, 1999. "Life-cycle preferences over consumption and health: when is cost-effectiveness analysis equivalent to cost-benefit analysis?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 681-708, December.
    2. Arrhenius, Gustaf, 2000. "An Impossibility Theorem for Welfarist Axiologies," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 247-266, October.
    3. 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.
    4. Norwood, F. Bailey & Lusk, Jayson L., 2011. "Compassion, by the Pound: The Economics of Farm Animal Welfare," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199551163.
    5. James Hammitt, 2013. "Admissible utility functions for health, longevity, and wealth: integrating monetary and life-year measures," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 311-325, December.
    6. Carlson, Deven & Haeder, Simon & Jenkins-Smith, Hank & Ripberger, Joseph & Silva, Carol & Weimer, David, 2019. "Monetizing Bowser: A Contingent Valuation of the Statistical Value of Dog Life," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 131-149, November.
    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. Treich, Nicolas & Espinosa, Romain, 2024. "The Animal-Welfare Levy," TSE Working Papers 24-1503, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    2. Läpple, Doris & Osawe, Osayanmon Wellington, 2022. "Animal Welfare, Altruism and Policy Support," 96th Annual Conference, April 4-6, 2022, K U Leuven, Belgium 321212, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    3. Hestermann, Nina & Le Yaouanq, Yves & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "An economic model of the meat paradox," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    4. Richard Cookson & Owen Cotton-Barrett & Matthew Adler & Miqdad Asaria & Toby Ord, 2016. "Years of good life based on income and health: Re-engineering cost-benefit analysis to examine policy impacts on wellbeing and distributive justice," Working Papers 132cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    5. Herrera-Araujo, Daniel & Hammitt, James K. & Rheinberger, Christoph M., 2020. "Theoretical bounds on the value of improved health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    6. 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.
    7. Hansen, Kristian S. & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Østerdal, Lars P., 2024. "Quality- and productivity-adjusted life years: From QALYs to PALYs and beyond," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    8. Sevilla, J.P. & Stawasz, Andrew & Burnes, Daria & Poulsen, Peter Bo & Sato, Reiko & Bloom, David E., 2019. "Indirect costs of adult pneumococcal disease and productivity-based rate of return to PCV13 vaccination for older adults and elderly diabetics in Denmark," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 14(C).
    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. Hansen, Kristian S. & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Østerdal, Lars P., 2023. "Productivity and quality-adjusted life years: QALYs, PALYs and beyond," Working Papers 11-2023, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    12. Espinosa, Romain & Treich, Nicolas, 2024. "Animal welfare as a public good," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    13. Shaun Da Costa & Owen O'Donnell & Raf Van Gestel, 2023. "Distributionally Sensitive Measurement and Valuation of Population Health," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 23-017/V, Tinbergen Institute.
    14. Richard Cookson & Ieva Skarda & Owen Cotton‐Barratt & Matthew Adler & Miqdad Asaria & Toby Ord, 2021. "Quality adjusted life years based on health and consumption: A summary wellbeing measure for cross‐sectoral economic evaluation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 70-85, January.
    15. 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.
    16. J. P. Sevilla & Daniel Tortorice & David Kantor & John Regan & Kinga H. Meszaros & Ekkehard C. Beck & Najida Begum & David E. Bloom, 2024. "Lifecycle model-based evaluation of infant 4CMenB vaccination in the UK," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 25(7), pages 1133-1146, September.
    17. Da Costa, Shaun & O’Donnell, Owen & Van Gestel, Raf, 2024. "Distributionally sensitive measurement and valuation of population health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    18. 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).
    19. Bengt Liljas, 2011. "Welfare, QALYs, and costs – a comment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 68-72, January.
    20. Hoarau-Heemstra, Hindertje & Kline, Carol, 2022. "Making kin and making sense of human-animal relations in tourism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).

    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-04645320. 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.