Abstract
This chapter addresses the tensions between the rights to urban space of humans and non-human animals, with a special focus on ethical issues relating to stray cats and dogs in Hong Kong. In Hong Kong, thousands of cats and dogs are abandoned on the street each year. Most stray animals are put down unless they can be re-homed. Such an urban policy represents an almost absolute prioritization of the interests of humans, specifically the importance of public health and safety, over the rights and interests of non-human animals. This chapter proposes a Buddhist approach to solving the problem of stray animals, contending that the relationship between human and non-human animals should be that of harmonious co-existence. Stray animals should be neutered and returned to their habitat rather than being put down. This chapter also contrasts the Buddhist approach with two Western approaches to animal ethics: (a) the utilitarian approach which states that the interests of animals should be given equal consideration as those of humans; and (b) the rights-based approach which argues in favor of granting rights to animals. It argues that the Buddhist approach is more suitable for addressing urban controversy issues for philosophical and practical reasons.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
An interesting contrast between utilitarianism and the Buddhist approach on the issue of animal welfare more generally is provided in a dialogue between Peter Singer and Shih Chaohwei (Shih & Singer, 2018).
- 2.
The nature of compassion is a virtue that one ought to exhibit. Unlike the rights-related approach, Buddhism does not see animal ethics through the language of claim rights and duties. The focus of Buddhism is how you should act, not what others can demand from you.
- 3.
This right is recognized as a human right by the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
- 4.
The Hong Kong government also launched a trial ‘trap-neuter-return’ program between 2015 and 2018, but decided not to continue to pursue the program as it failed to achieve its objective of an annual reduction of the population of stray dogs by 10%. However, since there were significant flaws in the research design (e.g., new dogs could easily enter the site and the period of study was too short as compared to the average lifespan of dogs), the failure of this trial program should not be taken to mean that any trap-neuter-return program is doomed to fail. Rather, in a latter section, I will provide evidence that there are successful trap-neuter-return programs in reducing the population of stray animals. See LegCo Panel on Food Safety and Environmental Hygiene Outcome of the “Trap-Neuter-Return” Trial Programme for Stray Dogs. LC Paper No. CB(2)1318/17–18(03) (May 8, 2018) (hereinafter LC Paper), https://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/quarantine/files/report_to_legco_eng.pdf (last visited October 29, 2021).
- 5.
There are also instrumental reasons to protect animal welfare or rights, for instance, the ecological approach focuses on the health of ecosystems and protecting certain animals, especially endangered species, is vital for maintaining ecological conservations.
- 6.
Other than the compassion-based argument, there are alternative arguments based on Buddhism that deal with animal ethics. For an overview of alternative Buddhist arguments, see Finnigan (2017).
- 7.
Another example is that Buddhism, unlike many other religions, condemns animal sacrifice. This condemnation is also motivated by compassion (Sahni, 2008, p. 48).
- 8.
For discussion on Kant’s duties towards animals, see, for instance, Denis (2000).
- 9.
Diamond (1978, p. 470) uses the term ‘human beings’ rather than ‘persons’. However, I believe the term ‘person’ fits her meaning better because ‘human being’ is often understood as a biological term whereas ‘person’ is more easily understood as a thick concept that may encompass duties.
- 10.
This is not to say that all Western philosophy neglects the importance of motive. For instance, Kant is concerned with the motive of action, though he recognizes a domain of strict right that is distinct from virtue. Western virtue ethicists (e.g., Aristotle) also see motive as important.
- 11.
If the stray dog exhibits aggressive behavior, training and rehabilitation may be necessary before releasing the dog back to its habitat (or potentially a new habitat further away from civilization).
References
AFCD. (2019). “Trap-Neuter-Return” Trial Programme for Stray Dogs. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department. https://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/quarantine/tnr_trial_programme.html
Barstow, G. (2013). Buddhism between abstinence and indulgence: Vegetarianism in the life and works of Jigmé Lingpa. Journal of Buddhist Ethics, 20, 74.
Bentham, J. (1789). An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. Clarendon Press.
Cavalieri, P. (2001) The animal question: Why nonhuman animals deserve human rights. Oxford University Press.
Cavalieri, P., & Singer, P. (Eds.). (1993). The Great Ape Project: Equality beyond humanity. Fourth Estate.
Chow, Y. (2021, March 18). Hong Kong emigration wave takes toll on its least political residents - its pets. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hongkong-security-britain-immigration/hong-kong-emigration-wave-takes-toll-on-its-least-political-residents-its-pets-idUSKBN2BA0QD
Denis, L. (2000). Kant’s conception of duties regarding animals: Reconstruction and reconsideration. History of Philosophy Quarterly, 17(4), 405–423.
Diamond, C. (1978). Eating meat and eating people. Philosophy, 53(206), 465–479.
Donaldson, S., & Kymlicka, W. (2011). Zoopolis : A political theory of animal rights. Oxford University Press.
Dunayer, J. (2004). Speciesism. Ryce Publication.
Dworkin, R. (1977). Taking Rights Seriously. Harvard University Press.
Finnigan, B. (2017). Buddhism and animal ethics. Philosophy Compass, 12(7).
Francione, G. (1996). Rain without thunder: The ideology of the Animal Rights Movement. Temple University Press.
Harvey, P. (2000). An introduction to Buddhist ethics: Foundations, values and issues. Cambridge University Press.
James, S. P. (2004). Zen Buddhism and environmental ethics. Routledge.
LegCo Panel on Food Safety and Environmental Hygiene Outcome of the “Trap-Neuter-Return” Trial Programme for Stray Dogs. LC Paper No. CB(2)1318/17–18(03). (2018, May 8). https://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/quarantine/files/report_to_legco_eng.pdf
Leung, C. (2021, August 7). Left behind: Hong Kong’s emigration wave leads to more pets being abandoned as owners leave city in a hurry. South China Morning Post. https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-crime/article/3144235/left-behind-hong-kongs-emigration-wave-leads-more-pets
Levy, J. K., Gale, D. W., & Gale, L. A. (2003). Evaluation of the effect of a long-term trap-neuter-return and adoption program on a free-roaming cat population. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 222(1), 42–46.
Nurse, A., & Ryland, D. (2013). A question of citizenship. Journal of Animal Ethics, 3(2), 201–207.
Palmer, C. (2010). Animal ethics in context. Columbia University Press.
Pu, C. (2014). Ethical treatment of animals in early Chinese Buddhism: Beliefs and practices. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Regan, T. (1983). The case for animal rights. University of California Press.
Sahni, P. (2008). Environmental ethics in Buddhism: A virtues approach. Routledge.
Shih, C., & Singer, P. (2018). Animal welfare: A Buddhist-Utilitarian dialogue. The Harvard Review of Philosophy, 25, 169–181. https://doi.org/10.5840/harvardreview2018251
Silvers, A., & Francis, L. P. (2005). Justice through trust: Disability and the “Outlier problem” in Social Contract Theory. Ethics, 116(1), 40–76.
Singer, P. (2015), Animal liberation: The definitive classic of the animal movement. Open Road Integrated Media (Original work published 1975).
SPCA. (2020). Animal welfare in Hong Kong. SPCA. https://www.spca.org.hk/en/animal-welfare/what-is-animal-welfare/animal-welfare-in-hong-kong
Steiner, G. (2008). Animals and the moral community: Mental life, moral status, and kinship. Columbia University Press.
Warnes, C. (2018). An update on the risks and benefits of neutering in dogs. The Veterinary Nurse. https://www.theveterinarynurse.com/review/article/an-update-on-the-risks-and-benefits-of-neutering-in-dogs
White, T. (2007). In defense of dolphins: The new moral frontier. Blackwell.
Williams, B. (2006). The human prejudice. In A. W. Moore (Ed.), Philosophy as a humanistic discipline (pp. 136–152). Princeton University Press.
Zhou, N. (2020, February 18). Peter Singer event cancelled in New Zealand after outcry over disability stance. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/19/peter-singer-event-cancelled-in-new-zealand-after-outcry-over-disability-stance
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank the editors for their valuable feedback. I would like to thank Larry Lai for this opportunity and his helpful comments. I would also like to thank Charles Beitz and Anna Stilz for their insightful comments. An earlier version of this chapter was presented at the political theory half-baked lunch seminar series at Princeton University. I would like to thank Daniel Browning, Claudia Cervantes Perez, Andrew Hahm, Gaby Nair, Jose Sanchez, Lynnea Shuck, Lindsay Van Horn, and Jocelyn Wilson for the helpful discussion.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Yim, E.LL. (2023). Analyzing the Conflict of Rights to Urban Space Between Humans and Stray Animals: From East and West Perspectives. In: Yung, B., Mok, F.K.T., Wong, B. (eds) Rights and Urban Controversies in Hong Kong. Governance and Citizenship in Asia. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-1272-8_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-1272-8_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-99-1271-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-99-1272-8
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)