Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Justice for Animals in a Globalising World

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Ethical and Political Approaches to Nonhuman Animal Issues

Abstract

In her chapter, Angie Pepper argues that we must think about justice for all animals through the cosmopolitan lens. After some preliminary remarks about global justice and cosmopolitanism Angie explores ways in which the current global order maintains and exacerbates systems of violence and oppression that target nonhuman animals. She argues that the theoretical foundations of cosmopolitanism necessitate the inclusion of many, if not all, sentient animals. Further, Angie suggests that defenders of nonhuman animal rights should be cosmopolitans about global justice before explaining why this does not require our forsaking our special relationships. Angie concludes with a plea to both mainstream defenders of cosmopolitanism and defenders of political justice for nonhuman animals to unite in developing genuinely inclusive theories of justice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For excellent discussions of how processes of globalisation have affected the utility of the Westphalian view of politics see Falk, 2002; Held, 1999; Slaughter, 2004.

  2. 2.

    Articulations and defences of cosmopolitan justice are exemplified in the following works: Barry, 1998, 1999; Beitz, 1975; Brock, 2009; Cabrera, 2004; Caney, 2005; Jones, 1999; Pogge, 1992, 2002a, 2005.

  3. 3.

    In this chapter, I assume that having the capacity for sentience is a necessary and sufficient condition for admission to the sphere of justice. Sentient beings are subjectively aware and have an interest in their lives going better rather than worse. Thus, how sentient beings fare in life matters from the perspective of justice since justice is essentially concerned with the fair distribution of resources and privileges to satisfy interests and well-being. See Pepper (2017) and sources cited in n.4 for more thoroughgoing defences of the idea that all and only sentient animals can appropriately be considered subjects of justice.

  4. 4.

    See, for example, Cochrane, 2012; Donaldson & Kymlicka, 2011; Garner, 2013; Smith, 2012.

  5. 5.

    While there is, to my knowledge, very little discussion about our duties of global justice to other animals, there are some exceptions including Cochrane, 2013; Cooke, 2014; Horta, 2013; Steiner, 2011.

  6. 6.

    The Foreign Agricultural Service/United States Department of Agriculture report states that these figures only “include fresh, chilled and frozen muscle cuts under HS headings 0201 and 0202 and exclude processed and prepared products which are not subject to U.S. tariff rate quotas” (FAS/USDA, 2015, n.1).

  7. 7.

    http://www.wearefur.com/fur-fashion/fur-campaigns/economist-campaign-2014 (Accessed 2/2/2016).

  8. 8.

    According United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime press release, their executive director, Yury Fedotov, publicly stated that “the US$8-US$10 billion reaped annually from this ruthless trade ranked it alongside the trafficking of human beings, arms and drugs in terms of illicit profits” (UNODC, 2013). It is worth noting that the larger figures cited often include unreported and unregulated fisheries trade, as well as illegal trade in timber.

  9. 9.

    It is important to note that even without anthropogenic climate change, the Earth’s climate would indeed change and the many animal species on this planet would be forced to respond or risk extinction. However, it is predicted that without human assistance and a reduction in carbon emissions, many species will be unable to keep pace with the rapidly changing climate of the planet caused by human activity (Hoegh-Guldberg, et al., 2008).

  10. 10.

    http://www.worldanimalprotection.org

  11. 11.

    http://www.spana.org

  12. 12.

    http://www.ifaw.org

  13. 13.

    While the plight of zoo animals in wartime has historically been truly horrific, it is important to keep in mind, as John Kinder notes, “that—even in times of peace—zoo animals remain, quite literally, captive subjects. If zoo animals are exceedingly vulnerable to wartime privation and attack, the primary fault lies with the institution itself rather than with an invading army” (2013, p.59).

  14. 14.

    Domesticated and captive animals are not the only casualties of human conflict, with modern wars also having “detrimental effects on wildlife due to direct losses, habitat destruction, the demands of displaced peoples for food and fuel, encouragement of trade in wildlife, and the establishment of environmentally unsustainable industries in the face of political destabilization” (Mishra & Fitzherbert, 2004).

  15. 15.

    One exception to this is Alasdair Cochrane and Steve Cooke’s discussion of “Humane Intervention” (2016).

  16. 16.

    This last point would be disputed by some cosmopolitans who have argued that we only have duties of justice to others when we have contributed to their plight (Valentini, 2013). Note, though, even if one were to adopt this position, humans would often have global duties of justice to nonhuman animals in disaster situations because nonhuman animal vulnerability to such events is often exacerbated by the actions of humans globally.

  17. 17.

    For a fuller elaboration of this argument, see Pepper, 2017.

  18. 18.

    See, for instance, Chris Armstrong who seems to assume that fish are a natural resource (2012, p.153 & 189).

  19. 19.

    Nussbaum (2006) is the exception here. However, while she initially includes animals as subjects of justice her commitment to political liberalism allows for gross violations of their rights, which means “animals are not genuinely recognised to be subjects but instead remain instrumentalities for the satisfaction of human needs” (Steiner, 2011, p.104).

  20. 20.

    To be sure, the needs and interests of individual nonhuman animals will vary across species and will also depend on the existing dependency relations between individual nonhuman animals and humans. Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka’s distinction between dependent agents and competent agents is instructive here (Donaldson & Kymlicka, 2011). Through the process of domestication, the needs of some animals have been altered and they are heavily dependent on humans for food, shelter, companionship, and care. Wild animals, on the other hand, are competent, as both individuals and communities, to meet their needs and take care of themselves and any others with whom they share their lives, without human intervention ( Ibid , p.175). Indeed, for wild animals it is often the actions of humans that threaten their ability to meet their own needs and which not only threaten the lives of individual animals, but also the communities of wild animals, and sometimes whole species in their entirety.

Bibliography

  • Armstrong, C., 2012. Global Distributive Justice: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, B., 1998. International Society from a Cosmopolitan Perspective. In D. Mapel & T. Nardin, eds., International Society: Diverse Ethical Perspectives. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, B., 1999. Statism and Nationalism: A Cosmopolitan Critique. In I. Shapiro & L. Brilmayer, eds., Global Justice, NOMOS. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beitz, C., 1975. Justice and International Relations. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 4(4), pp. 360–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beitz, C., 1999. Social and Cosmopolitan Liberalism. International Affairs, 75(3), pp. 125–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brock, G., 2009. Global Justice: a Cosmopolitan Account. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brock, G., ed., 2013. Cosmopolitanism versus Non-Cosmopolitanism - Critiques, Defenses, Reconceptualizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brock, G., 2015. Global Justice. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, E. N. Zalta, ed., URL: plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2015/entries/justice-global/

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, C., 2013. Bonzo’s War. London: Constable & Robinson Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabrera, L., 2004. Political Theory of Global Justice: A Cosmopolitan Case for the World State. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Caney, S., 2005. Justice Beyond Borders: A Global Political Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Caney, S., 2009. Cosmopolitanism and Justice. In T. Christiano & J. Christman, eds., Contemporary Debates in Political Philosophy. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane, A., 2012. Animal Rights without Liberation. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane, A., 2013. Cosmozoopolis: The Case against Group-Differentiated Animal Rights. Law, Ethics and Philosophy, 1, pp. 127–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane, A. & Cooke, S., 2016. “Humane Intervention”: The International Protection of Animal Rights. Journal of Global Ethics, 12(1), pp. 106–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, S., 2014. Perpetual Strangers: Animals and the Cosmopolitan Right. Political Studies, 62(4), pp. 930–944.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dent, F. & Clarke, S., 2015. State of the Global Market for Shark Products - FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 590. (Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, S. & Kymlicka, W., 2011. Zoopolis: A Political Theory of Animal Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, S. & Kymlicka, W., 2013. A Defense of Animal Citizens and Sovereigns. Law, Ethics and Philosophy, 1(1), pp. 143–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk, R., 2002. Revisiting Westphalia, Discovering Post-Westphalia. The Journal of Ethics, 6(4), pp. 311–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FAO, 2006. Livestock Policy Brief No 3: Cattle Ranching and Deforestation. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO. 2015. Food Outlook: Biannual Report on Global Food Markets. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAS/USDA, 2015. Livestock and Poultry: World Markets and Trade. URL: apps.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/circulars/livestock_poultry.PDF (Accessed 8/8/16).

  • Fur Europe, 2014. Annual Report: 2014. Brussels: Fur Europe. URL: www.fureurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Fur_Europe_Annual_Report_September_2015_smallsize.pdf (Accessed 8/8/16).

  • Garner, R., 2013. A Theory of Justice for Animals: Animal Rights in a Nonideal World. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Greenpeace, 2006. Eating up the Amazon. Amsterdam: Greenpeace International. URL: www.greenpeace.org/international/Global/international/planet-2/report/2006/7/eating-up-the-amazon.pdf (Accessed 8/8/16).

  • Held, D., 1999. The Transformation of Political Community: Rethinking Democracy in the Context of Globalization. In I. Shapiro & C. Hacker-Cordón, eds., Democracy’s Edges. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Held, D., 2003. Cosmopolitanism Globalisation Tamed. Review of International Studies, 29(4), pp. 465–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoegh-Guldberg, O., Hughes, L., McIntyre, S. L., Lindenmayer, D. B., Parmesan, C., Possingham, H. P. & Thomas, C. D., 2008. Assisted Colonization and Rapid Climate Change. Science, 321(5887), pp. 345–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horta, O., 2013. Expanding Global Justice: The Case for the International Protection of Animals. Global Policy, 4(4), pp. 371–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IDF, 2013. The Economic Importance of Dairying. URL: www.milkproduction.com/Global/PDFs/The-economic-importance-of-dairying.pdf (Accessed 8/8/16).

  • IFAW, 2014. Wanted—Dead or Alive: Exposing Online Wildlife Trade. London: International Fund for Animal Welfare.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irvine, L., 2006. Animals in Disasters: Issues for Animal Liberation Activism and Policy. Animal Liberation Philosophy and Policy Journal, 4(1), pp. 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irvine, L., 2009. Filling the Ark: Animal Welfare in Disasters. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C., 1999. Global Justice: Defending Cosmopolitanism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinder, J. M., 2013. Zoo Animals and Modern War: Captive Casualties, Patriotic Citizens, and Good Soldiers. In R. Hediger, ed., Animals and War: Studies of Europe and North America. Leiden: Brill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, C. & Fitzherbert, A., 2004. War and Wildlife: A Post-Conflict Assessment of Afghanistan’s Wakhan Corridor. Oryx, 38(1), pp. 102–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muhammad, A., Jones, K. & Hagerman, A., 2014. Theme Issue Overview: Emerging issues in Global Animal Product Trade. Agribusiness, 30(1), pp. 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagel, T., 2005. The Problem of Global Justice. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 33(2), pp. 113–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M., 2006. Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pepper, A., 2017. Beyond Anthropocentrism: Cosmopolitanism and Non-Human Animals. Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric. 9(2), pp. 114–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pogge, T., 1989. Realizing Rawls. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pogge, T., 1992. Cosmopolitanism and Sovereignty. Ethics, 103(1), pp. 48–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pogge, T., 2002a. World Poverty and Human Rights. Oxford: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pogge, T., 2002b. Cosmopolitanism: A Defence. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 5(3), pp. 86–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pogge, T., 2005. Severe Poverty as a Violation of Negative Duties. Ethics & International Affairs, 19(1), pp. 55–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pogge, T., 2010. The Role of International Law in Reproducing Massive Poverty. In S. Besson & J. Tasioulas, ed., The Philosophy of International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pogge, T., 2013. Concluding Reflections. In G. Brock, ed., Cosmopolitanism versus Non-Cosmopolitanism - Critiques, Defenses, Reconceptualizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poławska, E., Cooper, R. G., Jóźwik, A. & Pomianowski, J., 2013. Meat from Alternative Species – Nutritive and Dietetic Value, and Its Benefit for Human Health – A Review. CyTA - Journal of Food, 11(1), pp. 37–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, R. A., Crick, H. Q., Learmonth, J. A., Maclean, I., Thomas, C. D., Bairlein, F., Forchhammer, M. C., Francis, C. M., Gill, J. A., Godley, B. J. & Harwood, J., 2008. Travelling through a Warming World: Climate Change and Migratory Species. Endangered Species Research, 7(2), pp. 87–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowlands, M., 1997. Contractarianism and Animal Rights. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 14(3), pp. 235–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sangiovanni, A., 2007. Global Justice, Reciprocity, and the State. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 35(1), pp. 3–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scanlon, J., 2013. Tackling the Illegal Trade in Wild Animals is a Matter of Global Urgency. The Guardian. URL: www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2013/mar/01/cites-animals-illegal-trade (Accessed 8/8/16).

  • Scheffler, S., 1999. Conceptions of Cosmopolitanism. Utilitas, 11(3), pp. 255–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, A-M., 2004. A New World Order. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K., 2012. Governing Animals: Animal Welfare and the Liberal State. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, G., 2011. Toward a Non-Anthropocentric Cosmopolitanism. In R. Boddice, ed., Anthropocentrism: Humans, Animals, Environments. Leiden: Brill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, K-C., 2004. Justice without Borders: Cosmopolitanism, Nationalism, and Patriotism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • UNDP, 2015. Human Development Report 2015. New York: UNDP.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNIDO, 2010. Future Trends in the World Leather and Leather Products Industry and Trade. URL: leatherpanel.org/sites/default/files/publications-attachments/future_trends_in_the_world_leather_and_leather_products_industry_and_trade.pdf (Accessed 8/8/16).

  • UNODC, 2013. Press Release: Wildlife Crime Worth USD 8–10 Billion Annually, Ranking it Alongside Human Trafficking, Arms and Drug Dealing in Terms of Profits: UNODC Chief. URL: www.unodc.org/unodc/en/press/releases/2014/May/wildlife-crime-worth-8-10-billion-annually.html (Accessed 8/8/16).

  • Valentini, L., 2013. Justice, Charity, and Disaster Relief: What, if anything, is Owed to Haiti, Japan, and New Zealand?. American Journal of Political Science, 57(2), pp. 491–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weilgart, L. S., 2007. A Brief Review of Known Effects of Noise on Marine Mammals. International Journal of Comparative Psychology, 20(2), pp. 159–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • WWF/Dalberg, 2012. Fighting Illicit Wildlife Trafficking: A Consultation with Governments. Switzerland: WWF International.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre de Recherche en Éthique, Université de Montréal, Quebec, Canada

    Angie Pepper

Authors
  1. Angie Pepper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angie Pepper .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Independent Researcher, Huntly, Aberdeenshire, United Kingdom

    Andrew Woodhall

  2. Department of Philosophy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom

    Gabriel Garmendia da Trindade

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pepper, A. (2017). Justice for Animals in a Globalising World. In: Woodhall, A., Garmendia da Trindade, G. (eds) Ethical and Political Approaches to Nonhuman Animal Issues. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54549-3_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation