Beausoleil Ngaio J
Animal Welfare Science and Bioethics Centre, School of Veterinary Science, Massey University, Private Bag 11-222, Palmerston North 4410, New Zealand.
Animals (Basel). 2020 Feb 6;10(2):257. doi: 10.3390/ani10020257.
Compassionate Conservation and Conservation Welfare are two disciplines whose practitioners advocate consideration of individual wild animals within conservation practice and policy. However, they are not, as is sometimes suggested, the same. Compassionate Conservation and Conservation Welfare are based on different underpinning ethics, which sometimes leads to conflicting views about the kinds of conservation activities and decisions that are acceptable. Key differences between the disciplines appear to relate to their views about which wild animals can experience harms, the kinds of harms they can experience and how we can know about and confidently evidence those harms. Conservation Welfare scientists seek to engage with conservation scientists with the aim of facilitating ongoing incremental improvements in all aspects of conservation, i.e., minimizing harms to animals. In contrast, it is currently unclear how the tenets of Compassionate Conservation can be used to guide decision-making in complex or novel situations. Thus, Conservation Welfare may offer modern conservationists a more palatable approach to integrating evidence-based consideration of individual sentient animals into conservation practice and policy.
同情式保护和保护福利是两门学科,其从业者主张在保护实践和政策中考虑个体野生动物。然而,它们并非如有时所暗示的那样相同。同情式保护和保护福利基于不同的基础伦理,这有时会导致对于何种保护活动和决策是可接受的产生相互冲突的观点。这两门学科之间的关键差异似乎与其对哪些野生动物会遭受伤害、它们可能遭受的伤害种类以及我们如何知晓并确凿证明这些伤害的看法有关。保护福利科学家试图与保护科学家合作,目的是促进保护各方面的持续渐进式改进,即尽量减少对动物的伤害。相比之下,目前尚不清楚同情式保护的原则如何用于指导复杂或新出现情况下的决策。因此,保护福利可能为现代保护主义者提供一种更易接受的方法,将基于证据对个体有感知动物的考量纳入保护实践和政策中。