Obtaining Support for Eradication Programs Using a Common Ethical Language

Obtaining Support for Eradication Programs Using a Common Ethical Language

Cameron David Brewer (Central Connecticut State University, New Britain, USA)
Copyright: © 2018 |Pages: 11
DOI: 10.4018/IJT.2018070102
OnDemand PDF Download:
Available
$37.50
No Current Special Offers
TOTAL SAVINGS: $37.50

Abstract

When determining whether or not to move forward with an eradication program, the question of possible success must be raised. Successful campaigns often need support from the public and governmental institutions, but different stakeholders may highlight different concerns when an eradication program is proposed. In what follows, the author argues that using a common ethical language when discussing particularly divisive programs with the public can help garner support for those programs. More specifically, utilizing utilitarian theory can play a valuable role in obtaining public support for eradication programs involving appealing animals.
Article Preview
Top

Definitions

Before turning to the need for public support and the benefits of utilitarian theory, some terms need definition. Following Bomford and O’Brien (1995), “eradication” is defined as “the complete and permanent removal of all wild populations from a defined area by a time-limited campaign” (p. 249). Following Genovesi (2001), “invasive alien species” (IAS) is defined as “an alien species, subspecies or lower taxon which becomes established in natural or semi-natural ecosystems or habitats, is an agent of change, and threatens native biological diversity” (p. 6). Thus, it will be assumed that IAS targeted by the program pose a threat to the ecosystem and are not merely nonindigenous.1 Following Vane and Ruhhaar (2016), “appealing animals” are defined as mammals, birds, and pet species (p. 2).

Complete Article List

Search this Journal:
Reset
Open Access Articles
Volume 12: 2 Issues (2021): Forthcoming, Available for Pre-Order
Volume 11: 2 Issues (2020)
Volume 10: 2 Issues (2019)
Volume 9: 2 Issues (2018)
Volume 8: 2 Issues (2017)
Volume 7: 2 Issues (2016)
Volume 6: 2 Issues (2015)
Volume 5: 2 Issues (2014)
Volume 4: 2 Issues (2013)
Volume 3: 4 Issues (2012)
Volume 2: 4 Issues (2011)
Volume 1: 4 Issues (2010)
View Complete Journal Contents Listing