Definition
Animal welfare science is used to define how an animal is coping with the conditions in which it lives. There are several measurements about good animal welfare: it is healthy, comfortable, well-nourished, safe, able to express innate behavior, and if it is not suffering from unpleasant states such as pain, fear, and distress. (AVMA 2023)
While in animal rights movement, cruelty free refers to a label for products or activities that do not harm or kill animals anywhere in the world. Tested on animals and made from animals are two significant indicator for non-cruelty free. (Andre 2014)
History
In respect of animal protection laws were enacted as early as 1st millennium BCE in India. While significant progress in animal welfare did not take place until the late 20th century. In 1965, the UK government commissioned an investigation—led by professor Roger Brambell—into the welfare of intensively farmed animals, partly in response to concerns raised in Ruth Harrison’s 1964 book, Animal Machines. On the basis of Brambell’s report, the UK government set up the Farm Animal Welfare Advisory Committee in 1967, which became the Farm Animal Welfare Council in 1979. In the UK, the “Animal Welfare Act 2006” consolidated many different forms of animal welfare legislation. The 2019 UN Global Sustainable Development Report identified animal welfare as one of several key missing issues in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. (Wikipedia 2023)
The term cruelty-free was first used in this way by Lady Dowding who persuaded manufacturers of fake furs to use the label Beauty Without Cruelty and went on to found the charity Beauty Without Cruelty in 1959. The term was popularised in the US in the 1970s by Marcia Pearson who founded the group Fashion With Compassion. Then, in 1998, the United Kingdom started a trend by banning all testing on animals. Many other countries followed their lead soon after. (Wikipedia 2023)
Criticism
Animal welfare movement is not going far enough to protect animals’ interests as Tom Regan criticized. Advocating for the betterment of the condition of animals, but without abolishing animal use is inconsistent in logic and ethically unacceptable. While some animal rights groups such as PETA are supporting to alleviate animal suffering mainly. In short, there are even big contradiction in wide range of animal welfare: welfarism and abolitionism. (Wikipedia 2023)
The criticism of cruelty free is mainly on its expansion. “not tested on animals”, “we do not conduct animal testing”, “never tested on animals”, “against animal testing” or “cruelty-free”, those label has been used by some manufacturers but they are confusing and potentially misleading, since there is no clear legal definition as to what they mean. (Winders & Delcianna 2006)
Meaning to Bio-synthetic Fur
Back to my own project, the mission of bio-synthetic fur can not be easily defined as cruelty free but it is supposed to discuss as a project dedicated to animal welfare. Due to the concept of semi bio-synthetic fur is not abolition for animal use, instead, It aims to transform the original industry and protect employment in some traditional sectors. The idea of semi bio-synthetic is inclined to welfarism which is similar to the initiative of PETA.
Reference
- AVMA(2023), Animal welfare: What is it? Available at: https://www.avma.org/resources/animal-health-welfare/animal-welfare-what-it (Accessed on 11th June 2023)
- Andre, Claire; Velasquez, Manuel(2014) “Of Cures and Creatures Great and Small”. Santa Clara University, Available at: https://www.scu.edu/ethics/focus-areas/bioethics/resources/of-cures-and-creatures-great-and-small/ (Accessed on 11th June 2023)
- Wikipedia (2023), Animal Welfare, Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_welfare#Criticisms (Accessed on 11th June 2023)
- Wikipedia (2023), Cruelty-Free, Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruelty-free#cite_note-1 (Accessed on 11th June 2023)
- Winders, Delcianna (2006). “Combining Reflexive Law and False Advertising Law to Standardize Cruelty-Free Labeling of Cosmetics”. N.Y.U. L. Rev. 81: 454. Available at: https://login.library.utoronto.ca/index.php?url=http://bf4dv7zn3u.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Combining+Reflexive+Law+and+False+Advertising+Law+to+Standardize+%22Cruelty-Free%22+Labeling+of+Cosmetics&rft.jtitle=New+York+University+Law+Review&rft.au=Delcianna+J+Winders&rft.date=2006-04-01&rft.issn=0028-7881&rft.volume=81&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=454&rft.externalDBID=INYL&rft.externalDocID=1034665361 (Accessed on 11th June 2023)