Animals 2011, 1(1), 161-175; doi:10.3390/ani1010161
Article

Countering Brutality to Wildlife, Relationism and Ethics: Conservation, Welfare and the ‘Ecoversity’

1 Centre for Urban and Regional Studies, University of Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia 2 Sustainability Research Centre, University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia 3 School of Social Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 4 January 2011; Accepted: 13 January 2011 / Published: 27 January 2011
PDF Full-text Download PDF Full-Text [75 KB, Updated Version, uploaded 28 January 2011 11:59 CET]
The original version is still available [76 KB, uploaded 27 January 2011 10:02 CET]
Simple Summary: Wildlife cruelty is commonplace in society. We argue for a new engagement with wildlife through three elements: a relational ethic based on intrinsic understanding of the way wildlife and humans might view each other; a geography of place and space, where there are implications for how we ascribe contextual meaning and practice in human-animal relations; and, engaged learning designed around our ethical relations with others, beyond the biophysical and novel, and towards the reflective metaphysical. We propose the ‘ecoversity’, as a scholarly and practical tool for focusing on the intersection of these three elements as an ethical place-based learning approach.
Abstract: Wildlife objectification and cruelty are everyday aspects of Australian society that eschew values of human kindness, empathy, and an understanding of the uniqueness and importance of non-human life in the natural world. Fostered by institutional failure, greed and selfishness, and the worst aspects of human disregard, the objectification of animals has its roots in longstanding Western anthropocentric philosophical perspectives, post colonialism, and a global uptake of neoliberal capitalism. Conservation, animal rights and welfare movements have been unable to stem the ever-growing abuse of wildlife, while ‘greenwash’ language such as ‘resource use’, ‘management’, ‘pests’, ‘over-abundance’, ‘conservation hunting’ and ‘ecology’ coat this violence with a respectable public veneer. We propose an engaged learning approach to address the burgeoning culture of wildlife cruelty and objectification that comprises three elements: a relational ethic based on intrinsic understanding of the way wildlife and humans might view each other [1-3]; geography of place and space [4], where there are implications for how we ascribe contextual meaning and practice in human-animal relations; and, following [5], engaged learning designed around our ethical relations with others, beyond the biophysical and novel and towards the reflective metaphysical. We propose the ‘ecoversity’ [6], as a scholarly and practical tool for focusing on the intersection of these three elements as an ethical place-based learning approach to wildlife relationism. We believe it provides a mechanism to help bridge the gap between human and non-human animals, conservation and welfare, science and understanding, and between objectification and relationism as a means of addressing entrenched cruelty to wildlife.
Keywords: wildlife; ecoversity; Derrida; ethics; universities

Article Statistics

Load and display the download statistics.

Citations to this Article

Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Garlick, S.; Matthews, J.; Carter, J. Countering Brutality to Wildlife, Relationism and Ethics: Conservation, Welfare and the ‘Ecoversity’. Animals 2011, 1, 161-175.

AMA Style

Garlick S, Matthews J, Carter J. Countering Brutality to Wildlife, Relationism and Ethics: Conservation, Welfare and the ‘Ecoversity’. Animals. 2011; 1(1):161-175.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Garlick, Steve; Matthews, Julie; Carter, Jennifer. 2011. "Countering Brutality to Wildlife, Relationism and Ethics: Conservation, Welfare and the ‘Ecoversity’." Animals 1, no. 1: 161-175.

Animals EISSN 2076-2615 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert