Skip to main content

Animal Sovereignty Theory

  • 129 Accesses

Synonyms

Zoopolis

Definition

Animal sovereignty theory is an approach to territorial rights in which wild animals are conceived of as sovereign communities, entitled to be recognized as the sovereign controllers of their own spaces.

Introduction

Animals “are not brethren, they are not underlings, they are other Nations, caught with ourselves in the net of life and time, fellow prisoners of the splendour and travail of the earth.” So writes Henry Beston in his 1928 book The Outermost House (2003, 25). The idea was one echoed in the defining works of twentieth-century animal ethics, which tended to defend the idea that, when it came to wild animals, we should simply “[let] them be” (Regan 2004, 357). In one sense, animal sovereignty theory – the claim that wild animals should be conceived of as sovereign communities, entitled to be recognized as the sovereign controllers of their own spaces – offers a theoretical grounding of this view. In another sense, however, it calls to step beyond...

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Beston H (2003) The outermost house: a year of life on the great beach of Cape Cod. Owl Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane A (2013) Cosmozoopolis: the case against group-differentiated animal rights. Law Ethics Philos 1:127–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane A (2018) Sentientist Politics. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke S (2017) Animal kingdoms: on habitat rights for nonhuman animals. Environ Values 26:53–72

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Cormier AA, Rossi M (2018) The problem of predation in Zoopolis. J Appl Philos. 35:718–736

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson S, Kymlicka W (2011) Zoopolis. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson S, Kymlicka W (2013) A reply to Svärd, Nurse, and Ryland. J Animal Ethics 3:208–219

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson S, Kymlicka W (2015) Interspecies politics: reply to Hinchcliffe and Ladwig. J Political Philos 23:321–344

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Goodin RE, Pateman C, Pateman R (1997) Simian sovereignty. Political Theory 25:821–849

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Horta O (2013) Zoopolis, intervention, and the state of nature. Law Ethics Philos 1:113–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladwig B (2015) Against wild animal sovereignty: an interest-based critique of Zoopolis. J Political Philos 23:282–301

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Milburn J (2015) Rabbits, stoats and the predator problem: why a strong animal rights position need not call for human intervention to protect prey from predators. Res Publica 21:273–289

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Milburn J (2016) Nonhuman animals and sovereignty: on Zoopolis, failed states and institutional relationships with free-living nonhuman animals. In: Woodhall A, Garmendia da Trindade G (eds) Intervention or protest. Vernon Press, Wilmington, pp 183–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Regan T (2004) The case for animal rights: updated with a new preface. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer P, Cavalieri P (eds) (1993) The great ape project: equality beyond humanity. Fourth Estate, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Wadiwel D (2009) The war against animals. Domination, law and sovereignty. Griffith L Rev 18:283–297

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Wadiwel D (2013) Zoopolis: challenging our conceptualisation of political sovereignty through animal sovereignties. Dialogue 52:749–758

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Wadiwel D (2015) The war against animals. Brill, Leiden

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Josh Milburn .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Section Editor information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Milburn, J. (2020). Animal Sovereignty Theory. In: Kocsis, M. (eds) Global Encyclopedia of Territorial Rights. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68846-6_71-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68846-6_71-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-68846-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-68846-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social Sciences