Animal geographies III.

There is no animal geography without ethics. The very coupling of the words gives rise to an ethical endeavour; an acceptance that animals have a geography, a making visible of animals within our human geography and scholarship, an acknowledgement that our relationship with animals has consequences. For some, this ethical endeavour extends to politics and includes engaged activism or to individual commitment such as not to eat meat, not to ‘own’ a pet, not to visit zoos and so on. This is a personal choice but, at a broader level, animal geography, in recognizing animals as co-respondent subjects, gives them a moral placing within the academy that, arguably, they rarely enjoyed before. This final report considers the contribution of animal geography and animal geographers to a more informed ethics of human-animal relations, one that increasingly confounds an over-simplistic view of animals as merely moral patients to suggest an ethics which guides a broader, more inclusive moral community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Progress in Human Geography is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)