Animal Welfare in Australia: Politics and Policy

Chen, Peter

doi:10.30722/sup.9781743324738

Cited by 28 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 84 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite having made preliminary progress, activities of the AAWS were discontinued in late 2013 following the federal election of the Coalition Government in Australia, when funding for the Animal Welfare Advisory Council was withdrawn and the committee was disbanded [61]. Several stakeholders expressed their dismay at the decision, claiming that the AAWS was "able to bring animal advocates, veterinarians, government welfare people, and livestock industry leaders around the table to have progressive discussions" [62].…”

Section: Stakeholder Network In Animal Welfare: Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing Animal Welfare through Collaborative Stakeholder Networks

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this review, we discuss animal welfare as a complex and contested issue facing society and outline why collaborative, multi-stakeholder approaches are critical for effective policy development. Using the lens of “wicked problems” and drawing upon governance literature on policy networks, we identify important factors for working with the inherent complexity of animal welfare through the inclusion of various stakeholder perspectives. We present two case studies that illustrate policy network approaches to animal welfare and highlight the value of fostering collaboration among various stakeholder groups from the industry, community, research, and government sectors. We suggest that the influence of stakeholder networks will likely increase in coming years as newer forms of participatory governance become common. By understanding how collaborative stakeholder networks establish participatory governance, productive communication, and collective priorities, leaders in the field of animal welfare can more productively engage with stakeholders and achieve long-lasting improvements in animal welfare.

show abstract

Section: Stakeholder Network In Animal Welfare: Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing Animal Welfare through Collaborative Stakeholder Networks

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, in 2012 and 2013, Voiceless published a briefing and report on pig welfare entitled “Science and Sense: The Case for Abolishing Sow Stalls,” with a cover image of a sow's sad face behind bars. Despite the broader campaign goal of ending factory farming, animal protection organizations in Australia have generally adopted a pragmatic “incrementalist” approach to their campaigning (Chen 2016, 155). In order to mobilize consumers through the actions of the major supermarkets (Parker, Carey, and Scrinis 2019a), animal advocacy groups needed to frame the issue in a way that resonated with both groups of stakeholders.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Free Is Sow Stall Free? Incremental Regulatory Reform and Industry Co‐optation of Activism

Carey¹,

Parker²,

Scrinis³

2020

Law & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article critically examines how interactions between social movement activism, supermarkets, and the pork industry led to the voluntary adoption of “sow stall free” standards in Australia. We “backwards map” the regulatory space behind “sow stall free” products to show how the movement against factory farming became selectively focused on the abolition of one form of confinement for sows rather than on other forms of confinement and the conditions of the sows’ offspring, the piglets that are consumed. We argue that this facilitated an incremental shift to “sow stall free” production, allowing the concept of pig welfare to be corporatized in a way that maintains the dominant model of factory farmed pig meat production.

show abstract

“…The concept of 'regulatory capture' has been invoked by Goodfellow to explain the way Australian governments have been captured by the interests of the livestock industries, at the expense of the public interest (Goodfellow 2016). Yet the animal industry-friendly policies at the federal level in Australia and the USA have increasingly been challenged by corporations in other sectors of the food system, by the policies of other levels of government, and by public/consumer sentiment and animal welfare advocacy groups (Chen 2016). Large scale intensive producers, processing companies and their industry representative bodies have tended to resist direct and mandatory regulation of higher welfare standards, including moves to ban cages.…”

Section: Food System Actors and Dynamicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Coles and Woolworths have also sought to publicly align themselves with trusted animal advocacy organizations, and to thereby appropriate the 'ethical halo' that surrounds these organizations in the eyes of the public (Parker and Scrinis 2014). In 2013, for example, Coles began selling 'winged pigs' shopping bags to support Animals Australia's 'Make it Possible' campaign against factory farming, although they ceased doing so after strong opposition from the National Farmers Federation and livestock producers (Rodan and Mummery 2014;Chen 2016).…”

Section: Market Segmentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Caged Chicken or the Free-Range Egg? The Regulatory and Market Dynamics of Layer-Hen Welfare in the UK, Australia and the USA

Scrinis

Parker

Carey

2017

J Agric Environ Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the 1990s there have been a number of government and market led initiatives to improve the welfare of layer hens in the United Kingdom, Australia and the USA. The focus of these regulatory and market initiatives has been a shift away from the dominant battery-cage system to enriched cages, barn/aviary and free-range production systems. Government regulations have played an important role in setting some minimum welfare standards and the banning of battery cages in the UK and in some US states. However the commodification and market segmentation of higher welfare standards has also seen the growth in production and demand of cage-free and free-range eggs in all three countries. This paper maps and compares the developments in government regulation and market segmentation of layer-hen welfare in the UK, Australia and the USA. The role of labelling and certification in facilitating commodification and market segmentation will be examined, including the public controversies and legal conflicts over egg labelling. The key state, market and civil society actors in each country will also be identified, and their role in driving or resisting higher standards examined, including the increasingly influential role of animal welfare organizations and food corporations.

show abstract

Animal Welfare in Australia: Politics and Policy

Cited by 28 publications

References 84 publications

Addressing Animal Welfare through Collaborative Stakeholder Networks

Addressing Animal Welfare through Collaborative Stakeholder Networks

How Free Is Sow Stall Free? Incremental Regulatory Reform and Industry Co‐optation of Activism

The Caged Chicken or the Free-Range Egg? The Regulatory and Market Dynamics of Layer-Hen Welfare in the UK, Australia and the USA

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About