| Abstrakt: |
The proportion of income spent on food has been in steady decline. Most people could readily pay more for food. Indeed, most consumers already pay more than necessary by buying specialized products or convenience foods. But there are costs associated with cheap food produced from animals that reach well beyond the dollars paid by citizens at the checkout register of a supermarket or fast-food restaurant. A morally significant effect of pressure for cheap food production has been modifications to production methods that may have effects on animal welfare (e.g., by decreased space allowances). Cheaper food for humans sometimes involves greater pain and suffering for food animals; however, improvements, possibly even major improvements, in welfare could be achieved with only small increases in price to the consumer. The obstacle to change is in part economic inertia; producers resist change because buyers expect low prices. Deployment of public subsidies and gradual change could avoid these short-term effects, although protection is needed against imports from countries with even lower welfare consideration and environmental standards. From the viewpoint of doing what is appropriate for animal welfare and the environment, free-market competition should no longer be the sole determinant of food prices. Animal scientists can serve the long-term interests of animal agriculture by combining efforts to do the right thing for the welfare of animals with more traditional goals, such as increasing production efficiency. |
