Abstract
This paper examines the ethical complexities of industrial meat production through the lens of competing moral frameworks, including utilitarianism and deontological ethics. While industrial agriculture provides affordable food and supports global economies, it also raises significant concerns regarding animal welfare, public health, environmental sustainability, and labor conditions. Using the BSE crisis as a case study, the analysis highlights how efficiency-driven systems can obscure moral perception and normalize harmful practices. The paper further explores the role of language and moral psychology in sustaining these systems, particularly through mechanisms such as moral distancing and cognitive dissonance.
By situating animal ethics within broader patterns of marginalization, the paper argues that the treatment of animals reflects a recurring tendency to reduce living beings to economic units. However, rather than advocating for the complete elimination of industrial meat production, this paper proposes a harm-reduction approach as a more feasible and ethically grounded solution. Policy recommendations include limiting extreme confinement practices, reducing antibiotic overuse, and increasing transparency within food systems. Ultimately, the paper concludes that while no single ethical framework fully resolves the issue, incremental reform offers a practical path toward reducing harm while maintaining global food stability.
Recommended Citation
Benasso Barriga, Josefa
(2026)
"Do Cows Dream of Open Fields?: Moral Imagination in the Age of Industrial Meat,"
Caroliniana Undergraduate Research Journal: Vol. 1:
Iss.
2, Article 11.
Available at:
https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/usc-curj/vol1/iss2/11
Included in
Animal Studies Commons, Immunology of Infectious Disease Commons, Meat Science Commons, Medicine and Health Commons, Social Justice Commons, Sociology of Culture Commons