Incremental implementation: a novel approach to animal rights laws
When we think about what animal rights would mean we probably think about the big picture: a right not to be killed (no more eating meat), or a right of bodily integrity (no more testing life-saving drugs on animals). These are certainly good examples, but they are not the only story.
Arrival at your destination is usually extremely important, but the journey is often important, too. Sometimes the journey needs to be longer than it might be, if it is more enjoyable, or increases the chance of a successful arrival (avoiding tight train or flight connections comes to mind).
This is a proposal for a slightly longer journey, that might improve the chance of arrival.
Some people imagine that the public will wake up and say “What have we been doing to animals? We must stop!” But they probably won’t, at least not for a few years. There are plenty of reasons for that, including that rights for animals is an unfamiliar idea, uncomfortable, even nonsense. One way to address that is to start with smaller steps, so that people can learn about animal rights and decide whether they make sense. Stopping all testing on animals is a big ask, stopping testing on, say, beagle dogs, is a more manageable idea.
A concept known as incremental implementation might be a useful way of introducing the public to rights for animals.
The concept comes from the software industry, where it can be used to deliver substantial change with a stepping-stone approach. It is a strategic approach, where changes or new features are introduced step-by-step rather than all at once. It allows for gradual improvement, learning, and adaptation, minimising the risks and disruptions associated with large-scale transformations.
The same concept can be used in the field of animal rights, to introduce new laws gradually, step by step. To enable the public to learn about the concept of giving rights to animals, hopefully to become comfortable with it and to adapt to it with minimum disruption. Or maybe not, maybe people will push back, reject it, prefer the status quo.
Here are some suggestions for legislation that could amount to steady and purposeful progress, and yet be straightforward so the public can understand the scale and impact of what is being proposed:
- 1. Recognise animals as individual persons and not things.
We could take account of the preferences of an animal in divorce proceeding, instead of simply treating an animal as a property.
- 2. Build on traditional animal welfare principles but go further.
We could grant a right for animals to be represented at legal hearings which affect them.
- 3. Introduce welfare laws that also give rights for animals.
We could recognise animals as having legal standing in cases of breaches of animal welfare laws so they could be enforced by anyone on their behalf.
- 4. Grant limited rights for animals in specific situations.
We could grant a right to life and freedom of movement to wild animals living in our national parks.
These changes seem quite small, and they are. By introducing changes step-by-step, people can see clearly what is being proposed, what we are losing and what animals are gaining, and can decide whether they want animals to have those particular rights.
Perhaps progress towards more significant animal rights will be slower—it might not lead to widespread rights for animals at all—but at least it will be a transparent process.
Dr Sean Butler is an Emeritus Fellow at St Edmund’s College Cambridge, and Co-Director of the Cambridge Centre for Animal Rights Law.
