dc.contributor.author | Johansson-Stenman, Olof | swe |
dc.date.accessioned | 2006-05-12 | swe |
dc.date.accessioned | 2007-02-09T11:14:52Z | |
dc.date.available | 2007-02-09T11:14:52Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2006 | swe |
dc.identifier.issn | 1403-2465 | swe |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2077/2725 | |
dc.description.abstract | This paper discusses the standard welfare economics assumption anthropocentric welfarism, i.e. that only human well-being counts intrinsically. New survey evidence from a representative sample in Sweden is presented, indicating that anthropocentrism is strongly rejected, on average. However, most people appear to have a consequentialistic ethics, in line with conventional welfare economics. The moral philosophical literature is also briefly reviewed, and here too anthropocentrism receives little support. Indirect evidence from environmental valuation studies seems also to imply that a non-negligible fraction of people has non-welfaristic and/or non anthropocentric ethical preferences. | swe |
dc.format.extent | 28 pages | swe |
dc.format.extent | 149529 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.language.iso | en | swe |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Working Papers in Economics, nr 197 | swe |
dc.subject | Animal welfare; anthropocentrism; welfarism; ethics; ethical preferences; costbenefit analysis | swe |
dc.title | Should Animal Welfare Count? | swe |
dc.type.svep | Report | swe |
dc.contributor.department | Department of Economics | swe |
dc.gup.origin | Göteborg University. School of Business, Economics and Law | swe |
dc.gup.epcid | 4800 | swe |
dc.subject.svep | Economics | swe |