物质脆弱性和物种间关系:对灾害中动物法律地位的批判性评估

IF 1.3 Q1 LAW Griffith Law Review Pub Date : 2022-04-03 DOI:10.1080/10383441.2022.2092701
Ashleigh P. A. Best
{"title":"物质脆弱性和物种间关系:对灾害中动物法律地位的批判性评估","authors":"Ashleigh P. A. Best","doi":"10.1080/10383441.2022.2092701","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT As liminal, exigent moments in time, disasters cast light on the significance of animals’ relationships with humans. Through their materialisation, human–animal relations are revealed as taking myriad forms: loyal, neglectful, salutary, harmful, benevolent, deleterious. This article examines how a pervasive failure by the Western legal imaginary to acknowledge and account for the relational aspects of animals’ lives amplifies their susceptibility to harm during disasters. To this end, the article analyses two major dimensions of animals’ legal status: their status as property; and statutory provisions governing animal welfare and wildlife habitat. It consults three temporally and geographically disparate disasters which affected jurisdictions within the Western legal tradition, namely Hurricane Katrina, the Victorian Black Saturday Bushfires and New Zealand’s Canterbury Earthquakes, to scrutinise how each dimension of animals’ legal status aggravates their vulnerability to the adverse effects of hazards. Drawing from critical literatures which foreground and fault Western law’s inattention to the nonhuman material world, the article attributes this condition to an ingrained feature of animals’ legal status: that it overlooks the determinative role played by animals’ relationships with humans in securing or compromising their wellbeing and survival during disasters.","PeriodicalId":45376,"journal":{"name":"Griffith Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Material vulnerabilities and interspecies relationalities: a critical appraisal of the legal status of animals in disasters\",\"authors\":\"Ashleigh P. A. Best\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10383441.2022.2092701\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT As liminal, exigent moments in time, disasters cast light on the significance of animals’ relationships with humans. Through their materialisation, human–animal relations are revealed as taking myriad forms: loyal, neglectful, salutary, harmful, benevolent, deleterious. This article examines how a pervasive failure by the Western legal imaginary to acknowledge and account for the relational aspects of animals’ lives amplifies their susceptibility to harm during disasters. To this end, the article analyses two major dimensions of animals’ legal status: their status as property; and statutory provisions governing animal welfare and wildlife habitat. It consults three temporally and geographically disparate disasters which affected jurisdictions within the Western legal tradition, namely Hurricane Katrina, the Victorian Black Saturday Bushfires and New Zealand’s Canterbury Earthquakes, to scrutinise how each dimension of animals’ legal status aggravates their vulnerability to the adverse effects of hazards. Drawing from critical literatures which foreground and fault Western law’s inattention to the nonhuman material world, the article attributes this condition to an ingrained feature of animals’ legal status: that it overlooks the determinative role played by animals’ relationships with humans in securing or compromising their wellbeing and survival during disasters.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45376,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Griffith Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Griffith Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2022.2092701\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Griffith Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2022.2092701","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:作为时间上最紧迫的时刻,灾难揭示了动物与人类关系的重要性。通过物质化,人与动物的关系表现为无数种形式:忠诚、疏忽、有益、有害、仁慈、有害。这篇文章探讨了西方法律想象在承认和解释动物生活的关系方面的普遍失败如何放大了它们在灾难期间受到伤害的易感性。为此,本文分析了动物法律地位的两个主要维度:动物的财产地位;以及关于动物福利和野生动物栖息地的法律规定。它咨询了影响西方法律传统管辖区的三场时间和地理上不同的灾难,即卡特里娜飓风、维多利亚州黑色星期六丛林大火和新西兰坎特伯雷地震,以仔细研究动物法律地位的各个方面如何加剧它们对危险不利影响的脆弱性。文章借鉴了批评文献,这些文献展望并指责西方法律对非人类物质世界的忽视,将这种情况归因于动物法律地位的一个根深蒂固的特征:它忽视了动物与人类的关系在灾难期间保障或损害其福祉和生存方面所起的决定性作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Material vulnerabilities and interspecies relationalities: a critical appraisal of the legal status of animals in disasters
ABSTRACT As liminal, exigent moments in time, disasters cast light on the significance of animals’ relationships with humans. Through their materialisation, human–animal relations are revealed as taking myriad forms: loyal, neglectful, salutary, harmful, benevolent, deleterious. This article examines how a pervasive failure by the Western legal imaginary to acknowledge and account for the relational aspects of animals’ lives amplifies their susceptibility to harm during disasters. To this end, the article analyses two major dimensions of animals’ legal status: their status as property; and statutory provisions governing animal welfare and wildlife habitat. It consults three temporally and geographically disparate disasters which affected jurisdictions within the Western legal tradition, namely Hurricane Katrina, the Victorian Black Saturday Bushfires and New Zealand’s Canterbury Earthquakes, to scrutinise how each dimension of animals’ legal status aggravates their vulnerability to the adverse effects of hazards. Drawing from critical literatures which foreground and fault Western law’s inattention to the nonhuman material world, the article attributes this condition to an ingrained feature of animals’ legal status: that it overlooks the determinative role played by animals’ relationships with humans in securing or compromising their wellbeing and survival during disasters.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
Reconceptualising the crimes of Big Tech The current legal regime of the Indonesian outer small islands Mainstreaming climate change in legal education Skeletons in the cupboard: reading settler anxiety in Mabo and Love Post-enlargement (free) movement in the EU: who really counts as EU CITIZEN? understanding Dano through the lens of Orientalism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1