Dr Michael Morris Animal welfare writer nzchas.canterbury

During the election campaign, animal welfare issues tend to get neglected with politicians instead promising how they will make us all more prosperous – both by growing the economy and by more fairly redistributing the wealth we already have.

In this regard, it is interesting to note that almost every social ill in the politicians' sight (crime rates, abortion, teen pregnancy, obesity, etc) increase in places with greater disparities in wealth.

It is believed that in more equal societies, rich and poor alike feel greater levels of trust, more self esteem and less alienation, which lead to fewer incidences of self-destructive and other-destructive behaviour.

Simply increasing GDP of already prosperous countries like New Zealand however has little effect on improving society.

There is some evidence that improvements in animal welfare are also linked with greater equality.

On the individual level, those with higher income tend to eat more animal products, contributing to the associated welfare and environmental problems more animal production brings.

However, citizens in wealthy countries with higher levels of equality, such as Norway and Japan, eat less meat on average than those in less equal countries like New Zealand or the United States.

And the reduction is not only in red meat – those in more equal societies are also cutting down on chicken, and are not eating more seafood to compensate.

Chicken and seafood is perceived to be healthier than red meat (though the medical evidence for this is scanty), and less environmentally destructive, so a drop in chicken consumption may indicate a genuine concern with animal welfare.

This is especially good news for animals, considering the horrendous pain suffered by broiler chickens.

In general, more equal countries have stricter regulations surrounding intensive farming, including bans on hen cages, sow stalls, farrowing crates and foie gras production.

In New Zealand, the gap between rich and poor has generally increased between 1988 and 2010.

However, there was significantly less experimentation on cats and dogs during the years that equality improved.

There was no noticeable difference in numbers of other species experimented on, but it is perhaps understandable that compassion starts by considering the animals we feel closest to.

The above findings, particularly the reduction in meat consumption, strongly suggests that policies promoting a more equal society will lead to one that treats all its members with more respect, including the non-human ones.

Something to think about when deciding on who to vote for.

Note: The research described above comes from an unpublished paper I am submitting to Ecological Economics