大量争议是英国动物健康和福利政策的一贯特征。疯牛病,口蹄疫,牛结核病和badge扑杀,大型室内奶牛场,马戏团中的野生动物就是例子。这些政策问题本质上是规范性的;它们包括实质性的道德层面。本文回顾了英国动物福利咨询机构,如英格兰动物健康与福利委员会,农场动物福利委员会和动物科学委员会。这些机构起着关键的咨询作用,但在道德方面没有足够的专业知识来告知政策的道德层面。我们提议成立“动物政策伦理委员会”,以告知英国政府对有情物种产生重大影响的政策。我们审查现有的理事会(例如,纳菲尔德生物伦理委员会和荷兰动物事务委员会),并审查一些广泛使用的伦理框架(例如,横幅的原则和道德矩阵)。动物政策伦理委员会应独立于政府,成员应在伦理和相关学科方面具有丰富的专业知识。提出了一个多元化的六阶段伦理框架:(一)政策问题的具体化,(二)功利分析,(三)动物权利分析,(Iv)基于美德的分析,(五)动物福利伦理分析,和(六)综合道德分析。本文得出的结论是,在所有使用有知觉的非人类物种的社会中,动物政策伦理委员会对于公正和民主的政策制定是必要的。
Substantial controversy is a consistent feature of UK animal health and welfare policy. BSE, foot and mouth disease, bovine TB and badger culling, large indoor dairies, and wild animals in circuses are examples. Such policy issues are inherently normative; they include a substantial moral dimension. This paper reviews UK animal welfare advisory bodies such as the Animal Health and Welfare Board of England, the Farm Animal Welfare Council and the Animals in Science Committee. These bodies play a key advisory role, but do not have adequate expertise in ethics to inform the moral dimension of policy. We propose an \"Ethics Council for Animal Policy\" to inform the UK government on policy that significantly impacts sentient species. We review existing Councils (e.g., the Nuffield Council on Bioethics and The Netherlands Council on Animal Affairs) and examine some widely used ethical frameworks (e.g., Banner\'s principles and the ethical matrix). The Ethics Council for Animal Policy should be independent from government and members should have substantial expertise in ethics and related disciplines. A pluralistic six-stage ethical framework is proposed: (i) Problematisation of the policy issue, (ii) utilitarian analysis, (iii) animal rights analysis, (iv) virtue-based analysis, (v) animal welfare ethic analysis, and (vi) integrated ethical analysis. The paper concludes that an Ethics Council for Animal Policy is necessary for just and democratic policy making in all societies that use sentient nonhuman species.