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.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
- 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.
- 5.
- 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.
http://www.wearefur.com/fur-fashion/fur-campaigns/economist-campaign-2014 (Accessed 2/2/2016).
- 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.
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.
- 11.
- 12.
- 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.
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.
One exception to this is Alasdair Cochrane and Steve Cooke’s discussion of “Humane Intervention” (2016).
- 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.
For a fuller elaboration of this argument, see Pepper, 2017.
- 18.
See, for instance, Chris Armstrong who seems to assume that fish are a natural resource (2012, p.153 & 189).
- 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.
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.
Barry, B., 1998. International Society from a Cosmopolitan Perspective. In D. Mapel & T. Nardin, eds., International Society: Diverse Ethical Perspectives. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Barry, B., 1999. Statism and Nationalism: A Cosmopolitan Critique. In I. Shapiro & L. Brilmayer, eds., Global Justice, NOMOS. New York: New York University Press.
Beitz, C., 1975. Justice and International Relations. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 4(4), pp. 360–389.
Beitz, C., 1999. Social and Cosmopolitan Liberalism. International Affairs, 75(3), pp. 125–140.
Brock, G., 2009. Global Justice: a Cosmopolitan Account. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brock, G., ed., 2013. Cosmopolitanism versus Non-Cosmopolitanism - Critiques, Defenses, Reconceptualizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brock, G., 2015. Global Justice. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, E. N. Zalta, ed., URL: plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2015/entries/justice-global/
Campbell, C., 2013. Bonzo’s War. London: Constable & Robinson Ltd.
Cabrera, L., 2004. Political Theory of Global Justice: A Cosmopolitan Case for the World State. Abingdon: Routledge.
Caney, S., 2005. Justice Beyond Borders: A Global Political Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Caney, S., 2009. Cosmopolitanism and Justice. In T. Christiano & J. Christman, eds., Contemporary Debates in Political Philosophy. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Cochrane, A., 2012. Animal Rights without Liberation. New York: Columbia University Press.
Cochrane, A., 2013. Cosmozoopolis: The Case against Group-Differentiated Animal Rights. Law, Ethics and Philosophy, 1, pp. 127–141.
Cochrane, A. & Cooke, S., 2016. “Humane Intervention”: The International Protection of Animal Rights. Journal of Global Ethics, 12(1), pp. 106–121.
Cooke, S., 2014. Perpetual Strangers: Animals and the Cosmopolitan Right. Political Studies, 62(4), pp. 930–944.
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.
Donaldson, S. & Kymlicka, W., 2011. Zoopolis: A Political Theory of Animal Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Donaldson, S. & Kymlicka, W., 2013. A Defense of Animal Citizens and Sovereigns. Law, Ethics and Philosophy, 1(1), pp. 143–160.
Falk, R., 2002. Revisiting Westphalia, Discovering Post-Westphalia. The Journal of Ethics, 6(4), pp. 311–352.
FAO, 2006. Livestock Policy Brief No 3: Cattle Ranching and Deforestation. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
FAO. 2015. Food Outlook: Biannual Report on Global Food Markets. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
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.
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.
Held, D., 2003. Cosmopolitanism Globalisation Tamed. Review of International Studies, 29(4), pp. 465–480.
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.
Horta, O., 2013. Expanding Global Justice: The Case for the International Protection of Animals. Global Policy, 4(4), pp. 371–380.
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.
Irvine, L., 2006. Animals in Disasters: Issues for Animal Liberation Activism and Policy. Animal Liberation Philosophy and Policy Journal, 4(1), pp. 1–16.
Irvine, L., 2009. Filling the Ark: Animal Welfare in Disasters. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Jones, C., 1999. Global Justice: Defending Cosmopolitanism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
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.
Mishra, C. & Fitzherbert, A., 2004. War and Wildlife: A Post-Conflict Assessment of Afghanistan’s Wakhan Corridor. Oryx, 38(1), pp. 102–105.
Muhammad, A., Jones, K. & Hagerman, A., 2014. Theme Issue Overview: Emerging issues in Global Animal Product Trade. Agribusiness, 30(1), pp. 1–4.
Nagel, T., 2005. The Problem of Global Justice. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 33(2), pp. 113–147.
Nussbaum, M., 2006. Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pepper, A., 2017. Beyond Anthropocentrism: Cosmopolitanism and Non-Human Animals. Global Justice: Theory Practice Rhetoric. 9(2), pp. 114–133.
Pogge, T., 1989. Realizing Rawls. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Pogge, T., 1992. Cosmopolitanism and Sovereignty. Ethics, 103(1), pp. 48–75.
Pogge, T., 2002a. World Poverty and Human Rights. Oxford: Polity.
Pogge, T., 2002b. Cosmopolitanism: A Defence. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 5(3), pp. 86–91.
Pogge, T., 2005. Severe Poverty as a Violation of Negative Duties. Ethics & International Affairs, 19(1), pp. 55–83.
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.
Pogge, T., 2013. Concluding Reflections. In G. Brock, ed., Cosmopolitanism versus Non-Cosmopolitanism - Critiques, Defenses, Reconceptualizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
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.
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.
Rowlands, M., 1997. Contractarianism and Animal Rights. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 14(3), pp. 235–247.
Sangiovanni, A., 2007. Global Justice, Reciprocity, and the State. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 35(1), pp. 3–39.
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.
Slaughter, A-M., 2004. A New World Order. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Smith, K., 2012. Governing Animals: Animal Welfare and the Liberal State. New York: Oxford University Press.
Steiner, G., 2011. Toward a Non-Anthropocentric Cosmopolitanism. In R. Boddice, ed., Anthropocentrism: Humans, Animals, Environments. Leiden: Brill.
Tan, K-C., 2004. Justice without Borders: Cosmopolitanism, Nationalism, and Patriotism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
UNDP, 2015. Human Development Report 2015. New York: UNDP.
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.
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.
WWF/Dalberg, 2012. Fighting Illicit Wildlife Trafficking: A Consultation with Governments. Switzerland: WWF International.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights 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
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54549-3_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-54548-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-54549-3
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)