Positive Welfare in Science and Society: Differences, Similarities and Synergies

Abstract

Societal and scientific perspectives of animal welfare have an interconnected history. However, they have also, somewhat, evolved separately with scientific perspectives often focusing on specific aspects or indicators of animal welfare and societal perspectives typically taking a broader and more ethically oriented view of welfare. In this conceptual paper, we examine the similarities and differences between scientific and societal perspectives of positive welfare and examine what they may mean for future discussions of animal welfare considered as a whole. Reviewing published studies in the field we find that (UK and Republic of Ireland) farmers and (UK) members of the public (i.e., society) typically consider both negatives (i.e., minimising harms) and positives (i.e., promoting positive experiences) within the envelope of positive welfare and prioritise welfare needs according to the specific context or situation an animal is in. However, little consideration of a whole life perspective (e.g., the balance of positive and negative experiences across an animal's lifetime) is evident in these societal perspectives. We highlight how addressing these disparities, by simultaneously considering scientific and societal perspectives of positive welfare, provides an opportunity to more fully incorporate positive welfare within a comprehensive understanding of animal welfare. We suggest that a consideration of both scientific and societal perspectives points to an approach to welfare which accounts for both positive and negative experiences, prioritises them (e.g., by seeing positive experiences as dependent on basic animal needs being fulfilled), and considers the balance of positives and negatives over the lifetime of the animals. We expand on this view and conclude with its potential implications for future development of how to understand and assess animal welfare.

The Social Construction of Narratives and Arguments in Animal Welfare Discourse and Debate

“…This difference in perceptions is responsible for multiple co-existing concepts and definitions of welfare that are influenced by ethical views from different interest groups including the scientific community [ 127 ]. Therefore, multiple perceptions of good welfare through to a good life [ 30 ] can exist without necessarily conflicting with one another based on value-based judgments of what positive welfare is. Positive welfare acknowledges sentience and anthropomorphic terms (such as happy, pleasure) which demonstrate advancement in the animal welfare research domain.…”

“…The aim of the study is not to review societal understandings of good animal welfare per se (see [ 30 ]), but rather to explore the varied contribution from different stakeholders to the socially constructed narratives and argumentative discourse about animal welfare and its implications to add to our wider understanding of communication around animal welfare across the food production related discourse. This conceptual approach is informed by the work of [ 23 , 31 , 32 ] who examined the social construction of arguments more generally and also within the animal “rights” discourse.…”

Positive Animal Welfare: Bridging the Gap or Raising Inequalities Worldwide?

“…The recent interest in positive animal welfare may partly be understood in the light of this situation. Inspired by a zeitgeist occupied with human flourishing and positive psychology (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, 2000), those concerned with how animals are treated have come to think that there must be more to animal welfare than just the absence of sufferinganimals should not just survive and be healthy, they should flourish and be happy (Yeates and Main, 2008;Lawrence et al, 2019;Webb et al, 2019;Rault et al, 2020;Vigors et al, 2021), or have what they want (Dawkins, 2021). The interest in positive animal welfare has also been partly inspired by developments within animal welfare science.…”