Context, orders of worth, and the justification of meat consumption practices
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Context, orders of worth, and the justification of meat consumption practices. / Thorslund, Cecilie Agnete H; Lassen, Jesper.
In: Sociologia Ruralis, Vol. 57, No. Suppl. 1, 2017, p. 836–858.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Context, orders of worth, and the justification of meat consumption practices
AU - Thorslund, Cecilie Agnete H
AU - Lassen, Jesper
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - Although animal welfare is felt to be important by consumers, behavioural patterns do not fully reflect this. Rather than relating this attitude-behaviour gap to hypocrisy, this article, building on pragmatic sociological theory and an empirical study, focuses on context-dependent moral evaluations. An analysis of focus-group interviews conducted in three countries shows that meat-related consumption practices involve several competing sets of moral conventions, and the results demonstrate that public concerns about animal welfare vary depending on whether they relate to an everyday or production context. In the former, animal welfare does not play a big role, and given this it can be argued that people are not hypocritical, since the practices and perceptions are actually united within the given context. It is concluded that the lack of civic justifications in the context of everyday life calls for new ways of making animal welfare relevant in this context in order to support consumers in moving towards products with high standards of animal welfare.
AB - Although animal welfare is felt to be important by consumers, behavioural patterns do not fully reflect this. Rather than relating this attitude-behaviour gap to hypocrisy, this article, building on pragmatic sociological theory and an empirical study, focuses on context-dependent moral evaluations. An analysis of focus-group interviews conducted in three countries shows that meat-related consumption practices involve several competing sets of moral conventions, and the results demonstrate that public concerns about animal welfare vary depending on whether they relate to an everyday or production context. In the former, animal welfare does not play a big role, and given this it can be argued that people are not hypocritical, since the practices and perceptions are actually united within the given context. It is concluded that the lack of civic justifications in the context of everyday life calls for new ways of making animal welfare relevant in this context in order to support consumers in moving towards products with high standards of animal welfare.
U2 - 10.1111/soru.12143
DO - 10.1111/soru.12143
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:84995376526
VL - 57
SP - 836
EP - 858
JO - Sociologia Ruralis
JF - Sociologia Ruralis
SN - 0038-0199
IS - Suppl. 1
ER -
ID: 172857492