Should Animal Welfare Count?

Olof Johansson-Stenman ()

No 197, Working Papers in Economics from University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics

Abstract: This paper discusses the standard welfare economics assumption anthropocentric welfarism, i.e. that only human well-being counts intrinsically. New survey evidence from a representative sample in Sweden is presented, indicating that anthropocentrism is strongly rejected, on average. However, most people appear to have a consequentialistic ethics, in line with conventional welfare economics. The moral philosophical literature is also briefly reviewed, and here too anthropocentrism receives little support. Indirect evidence from environmental valuation studies seems also to imply that a non-negligible fraction of people has non-welfaristic and/or non-anthropocentric ethical preferences.

Keywords: Animal welfare; anthropocentrism; welfarism; ethics; ethical preferences; costbenefit analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: D60 D70 Q50 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 28 pages
Date: 2006-03-03, Revised 2006-05-09
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/2077/2725 (text/html)

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:hhs:gunwpe:0197

Ordering information: This working paper can be ordered from

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers in Economics from University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, University of Gothenburg, Box 640, SE 405 30 GÖTEBORG, Sweden. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Jessica Oscarsson ().