www.ecologicalcitizen.net LONG ARTICLE

Eating animals: An ecocentric perspective

Ecocentrism finds inherent value in all of , extending moral consideration to both Rob Percival biotic and abiotic components of . This raises challenging questions concerning the of food consumption. From an ecocentric perspective, what should About the author eat? Our species is heterotrophic – we are consumers of other – but which Rob is a food policy organisms should we consume? In particular, should humans eat non- animals? manager for a UK This paper offers an ecocentric perspective on this question. This perspective is informed environmental charity by an ethic of ‘flourishing’, which suggests that one should act in ways that contribute and the founder of Charter for Animal Compassion towards the flourishing of living organisms and the ecological systems in which they are (https://is.gd/CharterAC), an embedded. Applying this ethic, the paper explores whether the consumption of animals initiative for inter-species can be understood as contributing towards, or cohering with, flourishing, animal empathy. flourishing and human flourishing. The author examines each of these in turn, drawing out tensions and harmonies, to arrive at an ecocentric perspective on eating animals. Citation Percival R (2018) Eating cocentrism finds inherent value in all Applying this ethic, I examine the degree animals: An ecocentric of nature. It seeks the flourishing of to which the consumption of animals can perspective. The Ecological Eboth biotic and abiotic components be understood as contributing towards, Citizen 2: 33–9. of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. It or cohering with, ecosystem flourishing, Keywords goes beyond biocentrism, which extends animal flourishing and human flourishing. Agriculture; animal ethics; moral consideration to living organisms, Examining each of these in turn – drawing ; ecological to include ecological systems as wholes, out the tensions and harmonies that exist ethics; intrinsic value including their abiotic aspects, in the between them – I arrive at an ecocentric sphere of moral concern. perspective on eating animals. From an ecocentric perspective, what constitutes ethical consumption? Humans Ecosystem flourishing need to eat. We are animals, and all animals Humans participate in a diverse range are heterotrophic: consumers of other of ecosystems, and often affect these organisms. But which organisms should we ecosystems through the consumption of consume? What makes the consumption animals. In one sense this is unremarkable, of one morally permissible for consumption and predation are and the consumption of another morally characteristic of ecosystem functioning. impermissible? In particular, should While autotrophs, such as plants and humans eat non-human animals?1 algae, obtain nutrients from the soil or This paper offers a perspective on this oceans and manufacture their own food final question, oriented around an ethic of via photosynthesis, heterotrophs, such ‘flourishing’. This ethic suggests that one as humans and other animals, consume should act in ways that contribute towards autotrophs or the animals that consume the flourishing of living organisms and them. Detritivores, meanwhile, break down the ecological systems in which they are dead plant and animal material and release embedded. It understands ecosystem it again as nutrients into the ecosystem for flourishing to be of overriding importance, recycling. but remains committed to the well- Consumption is constituent of life; and being of individual members of the biotic the cycling and recycling of energy and community. nutrients via consumption is constituent of

The Ecological Citizen Vol 2 No 1 2018 33 Eating animals: An ecocentric perspective www.ecologicalcitizen.net

ecosystem flourishing. Schlosberg (2007: matter consists of plant material and 148) proposes that landscapes, habitats animal residues at various stages of and ecosystems may be understood as being decomposed, along with abundant “living entities with their own integrity” microscopic biodiversity that is responsible with “the potential […] to flourish.” A for the decomposition processes that flourishing ecosystem is one in which the convert this organic matter into the recycling of energy and nutrients occurs nutrients that plants need to grow. Soil in a manner that does not undermine ecosystems, particularly their organic the ecosystem’s integrity or diminish its components, are fragile. The Food and complexity, thereby allowing for “the Agriculture Organization of the United unfolding or realization of the potential of Nations (2015) reports that one-third of nature” (Schlosberg 2007: 152). the world’s soils are ‘degraded’ or ‘highly It is conceivable that a human population degraded’, including by being reduced in could consume animals in a manner that organic matter. Intensive monocropping coheres with ecosystem flourishing; is one of the primary causes of soil various indigenous hunting cultures more- degradation (Department for Environment, or-less explicitly aspire to do so (Descola, Food and Rural Affairs, 2009). In turn, 2013). And yet this is rarely the case. Our one of the primary drivers of intensive consumption of animals, both farmed monocropping is the need to produce feed- and wild-caught, often does not cohere crops for farmed animals (W W F, 2017). with ecosystem flourishing, but instead The degradation of soils is often framed undermines it. as a food security issue: without soil we Consider our consumption of wild- cannot feed a growing human population, caught animals. We are prone to consuming and on one estimate we have only 60 years these animals either to extinction or in of food production left (Arsenault, 2014). volumes that undermine the integrity and But from an ecocentric perspective, the complexity of the ecosystems of which they degradation of soil and the destruction of “In the past century are part. Our consumption of predatory soil ecosystems is an ethical issue in itself. humans have reduced fish, such as grouper, tuna, swordfish and Soil is of intrinsic value; the flourishing shark, provides one such example. In the of soil ecosystems is of intrinsic value. It the biomass of past century humans have reduced the can take a thousand years for a flourishing predatory fish in the biomass of such fish in the ocean by more soil ecosystem to form and, globally, we ocean by more than than two-thirds (Christensen et al., 2014). are losing the equivalent of 30 hectares of two-thirds.” This overconsumption has cascading these ecosystems every minute (Arsenault, consequences for the ecosystems in which 2014). these fish are embedded. Sandin and Animal farming is also a major driver of colleagues (2008) have shown, for example, deforestation, biodiversity loss, ocean dead that the overconsumption of Caribbean zones and species extinction (Machovina sharks has resulted in the deterioration of et al., 2015). It is also responsible for the sharks’ coral ecosystems via processes greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to the of trophic cascade. Similar processes occur entire global transport system (Wellesley on land: over 300 terrestrial mammal et al., 2015). Since recognizes species are threatened with extinction due forests, oceans, soils, animal life and to overexploitation for human consumption; flourishing ecosystems to be of intrinsic “insidious alterations of ecosystems” are value, it is clear that the consumption the ensuing result (Ripple et al., 2016: 7). of farmed animals poses grave ethical Our consumption of farmed animals concerns. also adversely affects both local and Not all farming of animals raises these global ecosystems. Consider, for example, ethical concerns to the same degree, the impact of meat production upon however. A very small proportion of soil ecosystems. Soil comprises organic animals are reared within agroecological and inorganic matter. Soil organic systems, which contribute far less to

34 The Ecological Citizen Vol 2 No 1 2018 www.ecologicalcitizen.net Eating animals: An ecocentric perspective

these outcomes. The consumption of non-intensive systems and in massively these animals could more reasonably be reduced numbers. Even with a reduced understood as cohering with ecosystem human population, the consumption of flourishing. meat would be relatively rare – especially Agroecology is a science and a set of when compared to today’s average per farming practices that seeks to mimic capita consumption levels in the wealthy Ecocentrism does natural processes, creating beneficial nations of the world. “ biological interactions among the not root moral components of the farm agroecosystem. Animal flourishing value in sapience Agroecological farms are richer in soil Ecocentrism finds inherent value in all of and , but organic matter, and are home to more nature, but that does not mean that our it recognizes that wildlife, than ‘conventional’ farms ethical responsibilities extend uniformly (Bengtsson et al., 2005; Leithold et al., to every facet of the natural world. When they provide grounds 2014). They also use fewer pesticides and presented with a pig we encounter ethical for a particular less energy-intensive artificial fertilizer responsibilities that do not arise when type of moral (Pimental et al., 2005). Animals are often we are presented with a potato. This is consideration. integral to agroecological systems as because the pig is sapient (thinking) and ” they provide natural fertilizer, and can sentient (feeling) and the potato (to the stimulate the growth of leguminous plants best of our knowledge) is not (though by feeding on pasture, sequestering carbon research may yet demonstrate degrees of and nurturing soil health (Muller et al., plant sentience). Ecocentrism does not root 2017) – albeit with some negative pay-offs, moral value in sapience and sentience, but such as the greenhouse gases that these it recognizes that they provide grounds for animals emit into the atmosphere (Garnett a particular type of moral consideration. et al., 2017). This moral consideration, I would suggest, Critics of agroecological farming argue derives from the potential of the animal that widespread adoption of such systems to flourish in distinctive ways – that is, to might be worse for ecosystem flourishing, express a spectrum of sapient and sentient as agroecology requires more land to species-specific capabilities (Nussbaum, produce the same volume of food (Lynas, 2006). 2011). The debate between proponents of Sentience is a challenging area for ‘land-sparing’ (in which food production scientific study as it pertains to subjective is intensified in order to free up land for states that can be difficult or impossible conservation and rewilding) and ‘land- to quantify, and appear to be irreducible sharing’ (in which agricultural land is to physiological processes or anatomical ecologically managed and ‘shared’ with structures. Nevertheless, researchers have biodiversity) remains unresolved (e.g. identified “overwhelming evidence” of Bennett, 2017). An ecocentric approach sentience in many non-human animals would propose that human population be (Proctor, 2012: 636). brought into this debate. By curbing and Most animals farmed for food today are reducing the current excessive human not permitted to express their full range population – in ways that are ethical, of sapient and sentient species-specific equitable and respectful of human rights, capabilities. Jones (2013: 1) reviews the and in synchrony with massive shifts in research into the sapience and sentience consumption patterns, particularly among of a number of species and compares this high-consuming populations – the wide- research to animal welfare policies and scale adoption of agroecological farming regulations. He concludes that “the moral could be achieved while simultaneously status of animals as reflected in almost freeing up land for conservation and all – even the most progressive – welfare rewilding. policy is far behind, is ignorant of, or Within this hypothetical scenario, arbitrarily disregards our current and best animals would still be farmed, though in science on sentience and cognition.”

The Ecological Citizen Vol 2 No 1 2018 35 Eating animals: An ecocentric perspective www.ecologicalcitizen.net

Animal welfare policy in the UK and in its relation to that animal’s flourishing. many other countries is founded on the Even under organic systems, few animals ‘Five Freedoms’, which were formalized will reach sexual maturity. What does it by the UK Farm Animal Welfare Council in mean for a pig to flourish as a sapient and 1979 (Farm Animal Welfare Council, 2012). sentient individual? What does it mean These are: for the pig to have the opportunity to 1 Freedom from hunger and thirst: by express its full range of species-specific ready access to fresh water and a diet to capabilities? Would this require that the maintain full health and vigour. pig reach sexual maturity? 2 Freedom from discomfort: by providing This is, of course, not the only challenging an appropriate environment including question that may be asked about how and shelter and a comfortable resting area. whether animal farming can be consistent 3 Freedom from pain, injury or disease: by with animal flourishing. Pending further prevention through rapid diagnosis and consideration of these questions, I would treatment. argue that, as a minimum, from an 4 Freedom to express normal behaviour: ecocentric perspective one would desire by providing sufficient space, proper that levels of animal welfare commonly facilities and company of the animal’s implemented today are advanced, with the “From an ecocentric own kind. aspiration of providing a life for farmed perspective one 5 Freedom from fear and distress: by animals that allows for the full expression would desire that ensuring conditions and treatment of their species-specific capabilities and which avoid mental suffering. their flourishing as sapient and sentient levels of animal individuals. welfare commonly It is worth emphasizing that the fourth implemented today of these is the only ‘positive’ freedom on Human flourishing are advanced, with the list (that is, a ‘freedom to’ rather than Philosophers have inquired into the the aspiration of a ‘freedom from’). meaning of human flourishing for Bekoff and Pierce (2017: 23) note that millennia. A full account is not possible providing a life for animal welfare policy often begins from within the space provided here, but one farmed animals that the position of a “welfare burden”. That is facet of human flourishing may be noted, allows for the full to say, the baseline from which such policy a facet that might be considered essential expression of their is generated is welfare conditions so poor to ecocentrism, and which is importantly that even minor improvements are seen relevant to the consumption of animals – species-specific as providing ‘higher welfare’ – even if the namely, our aptitude for empathy. capabilities and animals still live in very poor conditions Empathy may be understood as the their flourishing as overall. Consider 10,000 chickens living ability to inhabit the perspective of sapient and sentient in a shed; an improvement in animal another. Many cognitive scientists, as well welfare in such a case would be to provide as philosophers, argue that empathetic individuals. ” ‘enrichment’ – perhaps as straightforward perspective-taking is fundamental to as a perch to sit on. From an ecocentric the structure of human consciousness perspective, however, one should ask the and integral to our social and moral more difficult question of what it would sense (Thompson, 2001). What is more, mean for each of these chickens – sapient empathy is often cited in the literature as and sentient individuals as they are – to be facilitating an ecocentric outlook. “The provided with the opportunity to flourish. greatest mentor is Nature herself,” writes In the UK, certified organic systems Haydn Washington (2017: 5), to cite just provide the highest potential levels of one example from this Journal. “Empathy, animal welfare (Compassion in World and the ability to listen to place, is such a Farming, 2012), but challenging questions key part of becoming ecocentric.” may still be asked of these systems. Empathy in this sense involves not only Consider, for example, the question of the perspective-taking, but a sense of what longevity of each individual animal, and could be called benevolence or compassion.

36 The Ecological Citizen Vol 2 No 1 2018 www.ecologicalcitizen.net Eating animals: An ecocentric perspective

Various spiritual or religious traditions A nested hierarchy have placed high value on benevolence. Eating animals is complicated, for ethical ‘Love thy neighbour’ was at the heart conflict can arise. Should we prioritize of Jesus’s teaching. Various traditions the flourishing of the individual or the have recognized the Golden Rule: ‘Do to ecosystem? Is it better to eat a sustainably others as you would have them do to you’ sourced wild-caught animal or a higher- (Armstrong, 2007). welfare farmed animal? Such debates can In the Western tradition, empathy and quickly become emotionally charged. benevolence have often been prioritized Proponents of have, in within human society, but their extension particular, entered into heated debate with to the non-human world is central to the proponents of ecological ethics. Tom Regan ideal of compassion for all sentient beings (in)famously accused J Baird Callicott of in various Buddhist traditions. Echoes of “environmental fascism” for the latter’s a more ecocentric outlook perhaps also prioritization of ecosystem flourishing arise within the philosophy of the Neo- over individual animal rights (Regan, 1983: Confucian Wang Yang Ming (1472–1529), 362). Callicott (1980: 311) was an advocate who proposed – as quoted in Thompson of Aldo Leopold’s famous , (2001: 28) – that even when the ‘small which declares that: “A thing is right when ma n’… it tends to preserve the integrity, stability “Ecological and beauty of the biotic community. It is flourishing is the sees a child about to fall into a well, wrong when it does otherwise” (Leopold, prerequisite for he cannot help a feeling of alarm and 1949: 242). One interpretation of this commiseration. This shows that his ethic would be that it sanctions the the flourishing of humanity forms one body with the child. manipulation of individual animals in individual organisms. It may be objected that the child belongs service to biotic wholes. Regan’s charge is In a similar vein, to the same species. Again, when he that such instrumental treatment amounts the flourishing of observes the pitiful cries and frightened to an ecological version of fascism, and that appearance of birds and animals about individual animal rights must be given the the species is a to be slaughtered, he cannot help feeling highest priority. prerequisite for an ‘inability to bear’ their suffering. This The perspective I am proposing provides the flourishing shows that his humanity forms one body an intermediary position between these of individual with birds and animals. It may be objected two views. As an ecocentric perspective, it that birds and animals are sentient beings understands the flourishing of individual organisms.” as he is. But when he sees plants broken organisms to be dependent upon the and destroyed, he cannot help a feeling of flourishing of the wholes of which they are pity. This shows that his humanity forms constituent parts. Ecological flourishing is one body with plants. It may be said that thus the prerequisite for the flourishing of plants are living things as he is. Yet, even individual organisms. In a similar vein, the when he sees tiles and stones shattered flourishing of the species is a prerequisite and crushed, he cannot help a feeling for the flourishing of individual organisms. of regret. This shows that his humanity As Rolston comments, “Every extinction forms one body with tiles and stones. This is a kind of super-killing […] It kills birth means that even the mind of the small as well as death” (1992: 141). But ethical man necessarily has the humanity that recognition of these dependencies does not forms one body with all. license the disregard of individual interests. An understanding of human flourishing As I now hope to show, this conception rooted in empathy and benevolence instils of human flourishing as rooted in empathy the imperative to act in a compassionate and benevolence can help to resolve some manner, including towards individual of the tensions that arise when we consider animals. the eating of animals from an ecocentric A kindred approach is embodied in the perspective. ‘compassionate conservation’ movement,

The Ecological Citizen Vol 2 No 1 2018 37 Eating animals: An ecocentric perspective www.ecologicalcitizen.net

which aspires to marry conservation abundance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied practice with individual animal well-being. 42: 261–9. Compassionate conservation is not a rights Bennett M (2017) Changing the agriculture and position, but “a compassionate ethic [that] environment conversation. Nature, Ecology & Evolution brings empathy into decision-making 1: 0018. alongside other values” (Bekoff and Ramp, Callicott J (1980) : A triangular affair. 2: 311–38. The ecocentric 2015: 325). It begins with the premise that “ conservation initiatives should ‘do least Christensen V, Coll M, Piroddi C et al. (2014) A century perspective I am of fish biomass decline in the ocean. Marine Ecology harm’. The ecocentric perspective I am Progress Series 512: 155–66. advocating suggests advocating similarly suggests that when Compassion in World Farming (2012) Farm Assurance that when faced with faced with competing ethical demands Schemes and Animal Welfare: How the standards competing ethical regarding the consumption of animals, compare. Compassion in World Farming, Godalming, one should recognize the primacy of UK. demands regarding ecosystem flourishing, whilst also aspiring Curry P (2011) Ecological Ethics: An introduction (2nd the consumption to behave in a manner that is grounded edition). Polity Press, Cambridge, UK. of animals, one in an empathetic respect for individual Descola P (2013) Beyond Nature and Culture. University of should recognize the animals. Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, USA. primacy of ecosystem This ethical perspective will not always Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs provide a straightforward answer to difficult (2009) Safeguarding our Soils: A strategy for England. flourishing, whilst DEFRA, London, UK. questions, but that is not necessarily an also aspiring to objection to it. After all, as Curry (2011: 150) Farm Animal Welfare Council (2012) Farm Animal Welfare Council: Five freedoms. Available at https://is.gd/AjI7UT behave in a manner writes of ‘moral pluralism’, perhaps “our (accessed March 2018). ethical life consists of a number of different that is grounded Food and Agriculture Organization of the United principles or values which can conflict, in an empathetic Nations (2015) Status of the World’s Soil : Main and which cannot be boiled down to just report. FAO, Rome, Italy. respect for individual one.” If this is correct, then one key task Garnett T, Godde C, Muller A et al. (2017) Grazed and animals.” of an ecocentric ethic must be to help us to Confused? Ruminating on cattle, grazing systems, navigate through such conflicts, keeping methane, nitrous oxide, the soil carbon sequestration the primacy of ecosystem flourishing in question – and what it all means for greenhouse gas sight, while simultaneously remaining true emissions. Food Climate Research Network, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. to an ethic of respect for the individual, a commitment to compassion and to the Jones R (2013) Science, sentience, and animal welfare. Biology & Philosophy 28: 1–30. flourishing of other animals. n Leithold G, Hülsbergen K-J and Brock C (2014) Organic Notes matter returns to soils must be higher under organic compared to conventional farming. Journal of Plant 1 To avoid linguistic awkwardness, in what follows Nutrition and Soil Science 178: 4–12. the term ‘animal’ will sometimes be used to refer to non-human animals. Leopold, A (1949) A Sand County Almanac: And Sketches Here and There. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA. References Lynas M (2011) The Species: How humans really can Armstrong K (2007) The Great Transformation: The world save the planet. Harper Collins, London, UK. in the time of Buddha, Socrates, Confucius and Jeremiah. Atlantic Books, London, UK. Machovina B, Feeley K and Ripple W (2015) Biodiversity conservation: The key is reducing meat consumption. Arsenault C (2014) Only 60 years of farming left if soil Science of the Total Environment 536: 419–31. degradation continues. Scientific American. Available at https://is.gd/HIlFdl (accessed March 2018). Muller A, Schader C, Scialabba N et al. (2017) Strategies Bekoff M and Pierce J (2017) Animals’ Agenda: Freedom, for feeding the world more sustainably with organic compassion, and coexistence in the human age. Beacon agriculture. Nature Communications 8: 1290. Press, Boston, MA, USA. Nussbaum M (2006) The moral status of animals. Bekoff M and Ramp D (2015) Compassion as a practical Chronicle of Higher Education 52: B6–8. and evolved ethic for conservation. BioScience 65: Pimentel D, Hepperly P, Hanson J et al. (2005) 3 2 3–7. Environmental, energetic, and economic comparisons Bengtsson J, Ahnström J and Weibull A (2005) The of organic and conventional farming systems, effects of organic agriculture on biodiversity and BioScience 55: 573–82.

38 The Ecological Citizen Vol 2 No 1 2018 www.ecologicalcitizen.net Eating animals: An ecocentric perspective

Proctor H (2012) Animal sentience: Where are we and Schlosberg D (2007) Defining Environmental Justice: where are we heading? Animals 2: 628–39. Theories, movements, and nature. Oxford University Regan T (1983) The Case for Animal Rights. Routledge and Press, Oxford, UK. Kegan Paul, London, UK. Thompson E (2001) Empathy and consciousness. Journal Ripple W, Abernethy K, Betts M et al. (2016) Bushmeat of Consciousness Studies 8: 1–32. hunting and extinction risk to the world’s mammals. Washington H (2017) Sharing stories of deep connection. Royal Society Open Science 3: 160498. The Ecological Citizen 1(Suppl A): 5–6. Rolston H III (1992) Challenges in environmental ethics. In: Cooper D and Palmer J, eds. The Environment in Wellesley L, Happer C and Froggatt A (2015) Changing Question. Routledge, London, UK: 135–46. Climate, Changing Diets: Pathways to lower meat consumption. Chatham House, Royal Institute of Sandin S, Smith J, DeMartini E et al. (2008) Baselines International Affairs, London, UK. and degradation of coral reefs in the Northern Line Islands. PLOS One 3: 1–11. WWF (2017) Appetite for Destruction. WWF, Woking, UK.

Lamb and Buzzard Study series About the artwork: Oil on linen (41 x 58 cm; 2017). by Ben Walker

From the artist: Since childhood I’ve had a strong interest in wildlife and the environment. The recent paintings I have made reflect this. They are based on British landscapes and are painted in thin layers of oil paint, which is scrubbed into the weave of the linen and often removed and repainted over and over. Within the landscapes I try to convey a sense both of fundamental continuity and of constant change. Man’s impact on the ancient landscapes depicted can be seen in the hedges, paths and so on. Animals pictured are reminders of the livestock and wild species in the landscape or, in the case of the bears depicted, examples of what has disappeared from the British Isles.

Higher-resolution versions: https://is.gd/ecoartwork

The Ecological Citizen Vol 2 No 1 2018 39