Livestock Science 103 (2006) 257 262

www.elsevier.com/locate/livsci

The relativity of ethical issues in animal agriculture related

to different cultures and production conditionsB
R.L. Doerfler, K.J. Peters *
Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Institute of Animal Sciences, Philippstr. 13, 10115 Berlin, Germany

Abstract

Initiatives to incorporate European animal welfare standards in international trade agreements raise issues of ethical
relativism: (1) in the Fulani pastoral system the harsh environmental conditions result in a strong mutual dependency of
pastoralists and their animals. Thus, animal ethics is vital to ensure the survival of the pastoral family, framed as ethic of
securing survival; (2) the magnitude of human intervention, investigated in the Indian smallholder crop-livestock production
system keeping oxen for work, determines the farmers responsibility for adequate handling of animals. The apt anticruelty ethic
prohibits deliberate cruelty to animals and neglect; (3) in intensive animal agriculture, such as intensive poultry and pig
production in Thailand, the traditional ethical concept is no longer applicable and a new ethic encoded in law that respects the
animals natures is needed; (4) local moralities, as illustrated with the case of the llama system in the Andean highlands, deserve
adequate attention independent of the production system. Therefore, the issue of animal welfare should be regarded relative in
the global context and a dialogue between the cultures is encouraged to advance ethical concerns in animal agriculture.
D 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Ethics; Animal agriculture; Culture; Production system

1. Introduction livestock agriculture; the most pressing query being

Ethical issues are increasingly on the agenda in the
public debate not only in view of the fast progress in
novel technologies, such as biotechnology and nano-
technology, but also in relation to animal welfare in
B
This paper is part of the special issue entitled Ethics in Animal
Agriculture, Guest Edited by Dr. Michel Marie.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +49 30 2093 6363; fax: +49 30
2093 6370.
E-mail address: k.peters@agrar.hu-berlin.de (K.J. Peters).
1871-1413/$ - see front matter D 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2006.05.013
the human responsibility towards animals. In Europe
intensification and mass production in animal hus-
bandry have had detrimental effects. High yielding
farm animals have revealed severe health problems
and reduced life spans. Hence, ethical debates have
arisen with respect to the adequacy of intensive
animal production in order to sustain the well-being
of farm animals.
Animal welfare concerns are expected to become
an important question also on a global platform.
Impulses in this regard are given by recent European
258 R.L. Doerfler, K.J. Peters / Livestock Science 103 (2006) 257262
initiatives to incorporate the subject of animal welfare
in international trade agreements. However, the
adoption of European ethical norms by societies in
other parts of the world is highly controversial due to
immensely differing socio-cultural background, living
standards and ecological conditions. Until now very
little is discussed about own concepts of animal
welfare in societies of the southern hemisphere and
the fitting of foreign norms into tropical settings.
The objective of this paper is to place ethical issues
and values in animal agriculture in an international
context with the aim to develop a dialogue between
the cultures.
2. Animal husbandry in the tropics
While market-oriented livestock husbandry in
Europe is widely homogeneous, i.e., farmers produce
on an intensive, commercial level, animal agriculture
in tropical countries is more heterogeneous compris-
ing extensive pastoral systems, semi-intensive small-
holder crop-livestock production systems and
intensive large-scale commercial systems (Jahnke,
1982; Doppler, 1991).
Animal agriculture in the tropics is primarily based
on the predominant agro-ecological conditions reach-
ing from extreme arid settings to hot humid environ-
ments. Harsh climates resulting in the seasonal
scarcity of feed, exposure to climatic stress, or the
prevalence of highly contagious diseases and parasites
may have a deleterious effect on the well-being of
farm animals. Secondly, management standards differ
widely in tropical and subtropical animal systems. As
a rule, in pastoral and extensive smallholder livestock
production farm animals are allowed to range free or
to scavenge, while in large-scale poultry and pig
production systems farm animals are extremely
confined and deprived to perform their innate
behaviour. Draught animals frequently suffer due to
maltreatment by humans. Moreover, access to external
farm inputs may considerably influence rural micro-
economies and thus the fulfilment of animal needs, as
for shelter, feed supplements and drugs. Finally, the
prevailing local ethic and possibly the animal welfare
legislation constitute prerequisites for the specific type
of animal husbandry and the human treatment of farm
animals.
In accordance, animal agriculture in the tropics is
determined by
(1) agro-ecological conditions in the particular
geographical region,
(2) the magnitude of human intervention within the
system,
(3) the economic/technological situation and
(4) the existing value systems.
These four factors are not only crucial for the
structure and the development of livestock husbandry
in a particular area, but also play a substantial role
with regard to ethical issues related to animal welfare.
The relationship between the determinants of animal
agriculture and animal ethics will be exemplary
examined in four case studies.
3. Ethical concerns in different societal and
production system circumstances
3.1. Agro-ecological conditions and ethical issues
related to the problem of hunger: the case of the
Fulani pastoral system in northern Nigeria
Agro-ecological conditions are the dominant force
in the Fulani livestock production system. Animals
are frequently exposed to severe climatic stress
caused by high temperatures and intensive solar
radiation. An indirect effect of the aversive climate
is the scarcity of feed (e.g. Gefu, 1992, pp. 5358;
Iro, 2004). Therefore, a major ethic-related problem
in this area is the suffering from hunger compel-
ling the Fulani pastoralists to drive their herds to
distant places to overcome the seasonal scarcity of
food.
However, rigorous environment and shortage of
feed resources affect farm animals and humans alike;
the well-being of animals is intricately linked with the
well-being of humans. According to McCrindle
(1998) poor feeding and watering in dairy animals
resulting in declining milk yields has negative effects
on the nutritional status of the pastoral family and
additional income from purchasing or bartering milk
is lost. On the other hand, financial and technological
assistance by development aid to improve human
livelihood may benefit animals, because higher
 R.L. Doerfler, K.J. Peters / Livestock Science 103 (2006) 257262
disposable income supports better animal manage-
ment and care.
In the Fulani pastoral system the animals needs in
terms of leading a natural life are met to a large extent,
while confinement is minimized. Human dependence
on the animal herd is vast under pastoral conditions,
since animals and animal products are almost the only
source of income in the subsistence economy of
pastoral people. This strong reliance on pastoral
animals results not only in extensive care but even
in human affection of animals. From domestication
and human use of animals arises the obligation to
adequately feed and care for animals. According to
Dolan (1999, p. 149) b[t]his responsibility is a direct
consequence of the dependency of animals upon
humans [. . .] [and] arises naturally once someone
takes an animal under their protection in any circum-
stances. [. . .] [T]he greater the dependency, the more
serious the responsibilityQ.
When humans and animals are increasingly strug-
gling with the rigors of harsh environments, the
survival of the pastoralists may be seriously compro-
mised and may be ensured at the expense of animals.
This ethic may be defined as an ethic of securing
survival. Hence, there is a pressing need to involve
agro-ecological factors impinging on animal well-
being with very little human intervention possibilities,
when ethical issues in tropical animal agriculture are
under investigation. The closer an animal system is
linked to the prevailing natural conditions the lower is
the scope to adjust the environmental consequences
on animals and human beings to avoid the periodical
suffering of animals.
3.2. The extent of human intervention in animal
agriculture with regard to animal well-being and
animal ethics: the case of draught oxen in the Indian
smallholder production system
In India livestock husbandry is integrated in a
diversified agricultural land use (Devendra, 1995,
p. 5). Smallholder widely depend upon draught
animal power for land preparation and pulling carts
and oxen are highly esteemed for securing livelihood
of the farming family. This appreciation is articulated
in the respect for and religious veneration of cows,
which prohibits the slaughtering of cattle. However,
despite the traditional reverence of cattle, the ideals
259
are not always followed in modern India (Choudhury,
1994; Ramaswamy, 1994, 1998).
Attention has particularly to be paid to the welfare
of draught oxen, because by the nature of human
intervention suffering from inhumane treatment may
occur. By crude maltreatment, such as bbeatings,
twisting tails or prodding with sharp devicesQ draught
cattle may be forced to work beyond their physical
ability. Ill and injured animals are not always
withdrawn from work (Ramaswamy, 1998). Apart
from rough handling draught oxen may also suffer
from inadequate technologies, when pulling agricul-
tural implements and carts. Ill-fitting yokes and
harnesses inflict wounds on the animals that result
in reduced work output (Ramaswamy, 1994; Pearson,
1999, p. 794).
Ethical concerns are arising with the level of
human intervention, particularly if intervention causes
pain and suffering in animals. The negative effects of
human intervention are the prime focus of the
anticruelty ethic forbidding cruel acts against animals.
It is supposed that the level of intervention and the
farmers accountability for adequate handling and
housing of their animals are highly correlated.
Farm animals in the integrated crop-livestock
production system are kept under conditions to which
they are biologically adapted and constitutionally
suited (Thompson, 1993; Rollin, 1995, pp. 56).
Their quality of life is enhanced by the provision of
fodder, the protection against climatic rigors and
human care during illness. In turn the farming family
is provided with animal products and draught power
and therefore the humananimal relationship is
mutually beneficial (Rollin, 1995, pp. 56). Accord-
ing to Thompson (1993) the human responsibility to
care for animals and the knowledge to depend upon
them is an essential part of farm life.
Smallholder have a strong interest in the well-being
of their animals, because the thriving of the animals is
inextricable connected with the thriving of the animal
keeper. Animals may suffer from food scarcity, harsh
climatic conditions and disease due to limited human
control of natural conditions. However, any long-term
infliction of pain and prolonged suffering in animals
does not only contravene the interests of the animals
itself, but also the interests of animal keepers. Thus,
ethics and self-interest of farmers are closely related.
Consequently, at this level of human intervention an
260 R.L. Doerfler, K.J. Peters / Livestock Science 103 (2006) 257262
ethic is employed which forbids cruelty to animals,
mainly because animal abuse is disadvantageous from
an economic point of view. This anticruelty ethic is
directed to the avoidance of neglect in providing food,
water, and shelter as well as deliberate sadistic and
unnecessary infliction of pain and suffering (Rollin,
1995, pp. 48).
India has formulated the anticruelty ethic through
the dPrevention of Cruelty to Animals ActT in 1960
(see Government of India, 2003). However, the
implementation of the animal welfare legislation is
weak in India (Ramaswamy, 1998) and, as already
mentioned, the local perception is clearly distinct from
the existing value system.
3.3. Animal welfare and moral concern in modern
livestock production systems: the case of large-scale
commercial poultry and swine production in Thailand
Since the 1960s the dramatic growth of the Thai
economy caused the poultry and pig sector to expand
rapidly. Commercial development of poultry and pig
production was promoted by a few feed mill
companies which provided imported breeds, animal
feeds, drugs, and farm management expertise to
contracted producers (Tisdell et al., 1997). Mean-
while, Thai livestock production has entered the world
market; poultry products are exported into the
European Union (European Commission, 2005). In
these modern livestock production systems human
intervention and the economic/technological develop-
ment are significant with only minor agro-ecological
effects.
In contrast to traditional backyard rearing, Thai
large-scale poultry and pig production is highly
productive and is comparable to any other intensive
large-scale production system elsewhere in the world.
However, new sources of animal suffering have
evolved including (1) system related diseases (meta-
bolic disorders, mastitis), (2) reduced attention for the
individual animal in view of mass production and
micro-economic pressure and (3) suffering as a result
of deprived environments that suppress the perfor-
mance of innate behavioural patterns (Rollin, 1995,
pp. 1011).
In intensive commercial animal agriculture human
and animal interests increasingly diverge due to
productivity enhancing innovations. Since harmful
effects cannot be attributed to intentional cruelty, the
traditional ethic is inadequate and new ethical con-
cepts are required (Rollin, 1995, pp. 6, 1012). The
animal rights ethic suggested by Rollin (1995, pp. 17
18) advocates respect for the animals natures that is
no longer self-evident in intensive systems and
protects fundamental interests of animals.
Therefore, the massive changes in animal agricul-
ture induced by economic growth and the ensuing
application of novel technologies result in ethical
approaches for the treatment of farm animals, which
clearly go beyond an ethic against cruelty. Increased
intensification of production systems increases the
farmers accountability to more adequately consider-
ing the interests of animals and to invest in animal-
friendly technologies in order to improve animal
welfare. In animal products exporting nations, such
as Thailand, the full impact of globally accepted
ethical standards is relevant.
3.4. Local moralities concerning the treatment of farm
animals: the case of the llama breeding system in the
Andean highland
Llama breeders of the Andean highland maintain a
value system that symbolically integrates herds,
herders, alpine pastoral habitats and supernatural
powers (Webster, 1973; Goebel, 2001). In the local
ethic llamas are objects of elaborate religious rituals
that are chiefly concerned with llama welfare and
fertility. However, ritual ceremonies may also involve
the sacrificing of llamas. In ritual killings of animals
the heart is ripped out of the camelids bodya
method that is said to prevent the llama from suffering
and the person who has killed it from punishment
(Gareis, 1982, pp. 131139).
These communal activities indicate that concern
for animals is part of religious-philosophical traditions
with each of these traditions having its own paradigms
and ideas about animals (Waldau, 2002, p. 13).
Accordingly, the treatment of animals is determined
by the paradigm or the principle view of the world of
a particular culture. Sacrificing llamas is clearly
associated with the value system of the Andean
inhabitants, while it contravenes the view of people
in other civil societies. European animal welfare
standards without doubt disapprove animal sacrifices
and a world-wide adoption of these standards would
 R.L. Doerfler, K.J. Peters / Livestock Science 103 (2006) 257262
require abstaining from such practices embedded in
the traditional Andean ethic.
Western moral philosophy in general claims the
universal validity of ethical principles implying that
the Western way of treating animals is objectively
privileged as the true moral principle and is thus right
for everyone, everywhere (Harman and Thomson,
1996, p. 5; Cook, 1999, p. 7). On the other hand, the
view of ethical relativism denies the general validity
of Western ethics and holds that ethical standards
depend upon, or are relative to, an individuals
cultural-religious background rather than being abso-
lute (Des Jardins, 1997, p. 19; Cook, 1999, p. 13). As
a consequence, conformity with the own culture is the
sole moral obligation (Dolan, 1999, p. 100).
Dolan (1999, pp. 100101) stated that the fact that
different societies have different morals cannot be the
justification for an act to be right or wrong, because in
this regard drightT simply means in agreement with the
morals and dwrongT means to be in disagreement.
Although variation in moral standards between the
cultures indicates their relative nature, these standards
cannot be both relative to the society and absolute, for
to be absolute is to be unchanging and identical for all
human beings in all cultures. Dolan (1999, p. 101)
maintained:
bTo say that the rightness of an act is relative to the
society in which it is performed is not to say that
exactly the same act can be both right and wrong. It is
because the social context makes the acts different in
kind that one can be right while the other is wrong.
[. . .] Thus, the fact that moral emotions are culturally
relative does not prove that identical acts or persons
can be morally good in one society and morally bad in
another.Q
The issue of ethical relativism is a matter of
controversial discussion with, to the authors opinion,
no entirely persuading argumentation of both advo-
cators and opponents. In this regard, it may be
essential to recognize that social life and ethical
judgements can decisively be influenced by external
factors, such as ecological conditions, access to
technologies and economic power etc. These features
determine which decisions being made by an individ-
ual or by society under the given circumstances are
rational and which are not. Rationality of the decision
may also be crucial for value judgements.
261
4. Conclusion
This analysis revealed that husbandry systems, in
which agro-ecological conditions are dominant, offer
limited possibilities to avoid detrimental effects on an
animals welfare, particularly in terms of the period-
ical shortness of food. Alike, the extent of human
intervention determines the farmers accountability for
an adequate treatment of animals, as shown in the
smallholder production system. Investigation into the
large-scale commercial animal production resulted in
the postulate that the higher the technological input in
a production system the higher is the farmers
responsibility to meet the interests of animals. Finally,
the reflection on local ethical standards regarding the
treatment of domestic animals has indicated that the
value systems in different cultures can differ consid-
erably. According to the disputed view of ethical
relativism moral judgements are relative in nature
depending on a persons culture.
It can therefore be concluded that the introduction
of European ethical standards in tropical livestock
agriculture is critical, because
(1) natural conditions widely determine decisions in
animal agriculture and animal treatment,
(2) the magnitude of human intervention within the
production system and the level of economic/
technological development have an influence on
ethical queries, and
(3) existing moral standards in other cultures that
constitute the individual and social identity of
human beings in those cultures are ignored.
In accordance, the issue of animal welfare should
be considered relative in the global context. A
dialogue between the cultures is desirable to initiate
local debates and to develop ethics in animal
agriculture.
References
Choudhury, A.R., 1994. Hinduism. In: Holm, J., Bowker, J. (Eds.),
Attitudes to Nature. Pinter Publishers, London, pp. 53 78.
Cook, J.W., 1999. Morality and Cultural Differences. Oxford
University Press, New York.
Des Jardins, J.R., 1997. Environmental Ethics: an Introduction to
Environmental Philosophy. Wadsworth Publishing Company,
Belmont.
262 R.L. Doerfler, K.J. Peters / Livestock Science 103 (2006) 257262
Devendra, C., 1995. Mixed farming and intensification of animal
production systems in Asia. Paper presented at the joint FAO/
ILRI Roundtable, Addis Abeba, February 1995.
Dolan, K., 1999. Ethics, animals and science. Blackwell Science,
Oxford.
Doppler, W., 1991. Landwirtschaftliche Betriebssysteme in den
Tropen und Subtropen. Ulmer, Stuttgart.
European Commission, 2005. http://europa.eu.int/comm/agriculture/
agrista/tradestats/2003/graph51v/page_025.htm, [30.06.2005].
Gareis, I., 1982. Lama und Alpaca in der Religion der rezenten
Bewohner des zentralen und suedlichen Andengebietes. Klaus
Renner Verlag, Hohenschaeftlarn.
Gefu, J.O., 1992. Pastoralist perspectives in Nigeria: The Fulbe of
Udubo grazing reserve. Nordiska Afrikainstitutet. The Scandi-
navian Institute of African Studies, Uppsala.
Goebel, B., 2001. The symbolism of llama breeding in North-
Western Argentina. In: Gerken, M., Renieri, C. (Eds.), Progress
in South American Camelids Research. Proceedings of the 3rd
European Symposium and SUPREME European Seminar,
EAAP publication, vol. 105, pp. 175 180. Goettingen, Ger-
many, 2729 May 1999.
Government of India, 2003. The prevention of cruelty to animals
act, 1960. http://www.envfor.nic.in/legis/awbi/awbi01.html,
[11.09.2003].
Harman, G., Thomson, J.J., 1996. Moral Relativism and Moral
Objectivity. Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge.
Iro, I., 2004. Fulani herding system. http://www.gamji.com/fulani4.
htm, [17.02.2004].
Jahnke, H.E., 1982. Livestock Production Systems and Livestock
Development in Tropical Africa. Kieler Wissenschaftsverlag
Vauk, Kiel.
McCrindle, C.M.E., 1998. The community development approach
to animal welfare: an African perspective. Appl. Anim. Behav.
Sci. 59, 227 233.
Pearson, R.A., 1999. Work animal power. In: Payne, W.J.A.,
Wilson, R.T. (Eds.), An Introduction to Animal Husbandry in
the Tropics, Fifth edition. Blackwell Science, Oxford.
Ramaswamy, N.S., 1994. Draught animals and welfare. Rev. Sci.
Tech., Off. Int. Epiz. 13, 195 216.
Ramaswamy, N.S., 1998. Draught animal welfare. Appl. Anim.
Behav. Sci. 59, 73 84.
Rollin, B.E., 1995. Farm Animal Welfare. Iowa State University
Press, Ames.
Tisdell, C., Murphy, T., Kehren, T., 1997. Characteristics of
Thailands commercial pig and poultry industries, with interna-
tional comparisons. World Anim. Rev. 89, 1997/2.
Thompson, P.B., 1993. Animals in the agrarian ideal. J. Agric.
Environ. Ethics 6 (Suppl. 1), 36 49.
Waldau, P., 2002. The Specter of Speciesism: Buddhist and
Christian Views of Animals. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Webster, S., 1973. Native pastoralism in the South Andes.
Ethnology 12, 115 133.