Monetizing Animal Welfare Impacts for Benefit–Cost Analysis
Mark Budolfson,
Romain Espinosa (),
Bob Fischer and
Nicolas Treich
Additional contact information
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 nationale des ponts et chaussées - Université Paris-Saclay - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Bob Fischer: Texas State University and Rethink Priorities
Post-Print from HAL
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.
Keywords: Cost-benefit analysis; Animal welfare policy; Welfare economics; Ecological economics; Non-market; Utilitarianism; Ethics; Speciesism; Animal rights law (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024-04-25
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-04645320v1
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)
Published in Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, 2024, pp.1-18. ⟨10.1017/bca.2024.19⟩
Downloads: (external link)
https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-04645320v1/document (application/pdf)
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04645320
DOI: 10.1017/bca.2024.19
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().