Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Milking It for All It’s Worth

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Milking It for All It’s Worth: Unpalatable Practices, Dairy Cows and Veterinary Work?

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Milking It for All It’s Worth: Unpalatable Practices, Dairy Cows and Veterinary Work? / Clarke, Caroline; Knights, David.
In: Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 176, No. 4, 30.04.2022, p. 673-688.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Clarke C, Knights D. Milking It for All It’s Worth: Unpalatable Practices, Dairy Cows and Veterinary Work? Journal of Business Ethics. 2022 Apr 30;176(4):673-688. Epub 2021 Jan 11. doi: 10.1007/s10551-020-04666-3

Author

Clarke, Caroline ; Knights, David. / Milking It for All It’s Worth : Unpalatable Practices, Dairy Cows and Veterinary Work?. In: Journal of Business Ethics. 2022 ; Vol. 176, No. 4. pp. 673-688.

Bibtex

@article{2666cec9d10f4d199c52109afe1fcff9,
title = "Milking It for All It{\textquoteright}s Worth: Unpalatable Practices, Dairy Cows and Veterinary Work?",
abstract = "Viewing animals as a disposable resource is by no means novel, but does milking the cow for all its worth now represent a previously unimaginable level of exploitation? New technology has intensified milk production fourfold over the last 50 years, rendering the cow vulnerable to various and frequent clinical interventions deemed necessary to meet the demands for dairy products. A major question is whether or not the veterinary code of practice fits, or is in ethical tension, with the administration of {\textquoteleft}efficient{\textquoteright} techniques, such as artificial insemination, to enhance reproduction levels among cattle? Vets perform these interventions and their {\textquoteleft}success{\textquoteright} is measured by the maximisation of milk production, requiring perpetually pregnant cows. Our empirical research on 33 farm vets explores how their professional ethical code promising to protect the welfare of the animal {\textquoteleft}above all else{\textquoteright}, is increasingly in conflict with, and subordinate to, the financial demands of clients. Since vets cannot stand outside of the productive power–knowledge relations that have intensified the consumption of animal bodily parts and secretions, we argue that a process of adiaphorization{\textquoteright} (Bauman and Lyon, Liquid surveillance, Polity Press, Cambridge, 2013, p. 8) occurs, whereby humans become morally indifferent to cruel practices deemed necessary to our consumerist ways of life. However, this indifference reflects and reinforces a taken-for-granted anthropocentrism among vets, animal owners and the population generally. We suggest that posthumanist ideas may offer new insights for the study of human–animal relations in organisations that transcend the coercive and negative impact of discourses that deny any alternative to prevailing farm/veterinary practices. Our study has major implications in relation to climate warming and zoonotic diseases, both partly derived from our unethical relationship to animals, that are increasingly threatening our, and their, lives.",
keywords = "Adiaphorization, Code of ethics, Dairy cow, Posthumanism, Veterinary surgeons",
author = "Caroline Clarke and David Knights",
year = "2022",
month = apr,
day = "30",
doi = "10.1007/s10551-020-04666-3",
language = "English",
volume = "176",
pages = "673--688",
journal = "Journal of Business Ethics",
issn = "0167-4544",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Milking It for All It’s Worth

T2 - Unpalatable Practices, Dairy Cows and Veterinary Work?

AU - Clarke, Caroline

AU - Knights, David

PY - 2022/4/30

Y1 - 2022/4/30

N2 - Viewing animals as a disposable resource is by no means novel, but does milking the cow for all its worth now represent a previously unimaginable level of exploitation? New technology has intensified milk production fourfold over the last 50 years, rendering the cow vulnerable to various and frequent clinical interventions deemed necessary to meet the demands for dairy products. A major question is whether or not the veterinary code of practice fits, or is in ethical tension, with the administration of ‘efficient’ techniques, such as artificial insemination, to enhance reproduction levels among cattle? Vets perform these interventions and their ‘success’ is measured by the maximisation of milk production, requiring perpetually pregnant cows. Our empirical research on 33 farm vets explores how their professional ethical code promising to protect the welfare of the animal ‘above all else’, is increasingly in conflict with, and subordinate to, the financial demands of clients. Since vets cannot stand outside of the productive power–knowledge relations that have intensified the consumption of animal bodily parts and secretions, we argue that a process of adiaphorization’ (Bauman and Lyon, Liquid surveillance, Polity Press, Cambridge, 2013, p. 8) occurs, whereby humans become morally indifferent to cruel practices deemed necessary to our consumerist ways of life. However, this indifference reflects and reinforces a taken-for-granted anthropocentrism among vets, animal owners and the population generally. We suggest that posthumanist ideas may offer new insights for the study of human–animal relations in organisations that transcend the coercive and negative impact of discourses that deny any alternative to prevailing farm/veterinary practices. Our study has major implications in relation to climate warming and zoonotic diseases, both partly derived from our unethical relationship to animals, that are increasingly threatening our, and their, lives.

AB - Viewing animals as a disposable resource is by no means novel, but does milking the cow for all its worth now represent a previously unimaginable level of exploitation? New technology has intensified milk production fourfold over the last 50 years, rendering the cow vulnerable to various and frequent clinical interventions deemed necessary to meet the demands for dairy products. A major question is whether or not the veterinary code of practice fits, or is in ethical tension, with the administration of ‘efficient’ techniques, such as artificial insemination, to enhance reproduction levels among cattle? Vets perform these interventions and their ‘success’ is measured by the maximisation of milk production, requiring perpetually pregnant cows. Our empirical research on 33 farm vets explores how their professional ethical code promising to protect the welfare of the animal ‘above all else’, is increasingly in conflict with, and subordinate to, the financial demands of clients. Since vets cannot stand outside of the productive power–knowledge relations that have intensified the consumption of animal bodily parts and secretions, we argue that a process of adiaphorization’ (Bauman and Lyon, Liquid surveillance, Polity Press, Cambridge, 2013, p. 8) occurs, whereby humans become morally indifferent to cruel practices deemed necessary to our consumerist ways of life. However, this indifference reflects and reinforces a taken-for-granted anthropocentrism among vets, animal owners and the population generally. We suggest that posthumanist ideas may offer new insights for the study of human–animal relations in organisations that transcend the coercive and negative impact of discourses that deny any alternative to prevailing farm/veterinary practices. Our study has major implications in relation to climate warming and zoonotic diseases, both partly derived from our unethical relationship to animals, that are increasingly threatening our, and their, lives.

KW - Adiaphorization

KW - Code of ethics

KW - Dairy cow

KW - Posthumanism

KW - Veterinary surgeons

U2 - 10.1007/s10551-020-04666-3

DO - 10.1007/s10551-020-04666-3

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85099348407

VL - 176

SP - 673

EP - 688

JO - Journal of Business Ethics

JF - Journal of Business Ethics

SN - 0167-4544

IS - 4

ER -