File(s) under permanent embargo
Reason: This item is currently closed access.
The Boyd Group and Animal Experimentation
journal contributionposted on 2018-05-02, 16:16 authored by Robert Garner
This article is an account of the work of the Boyd Group, an informal grouping of stakeholders on both sides of the debate about animal experimentation formed in Britain in the early 1990s. It is an explorative case study which aims to map the opinion-forming processes of the participants of the Boyd Group, many of whom were interviewed by the author, in light of deliberative theory and with the intention of generating suggestions for improved democratic practices in representative bodies split by seemingly intractable moral differences. Not only is animal experimentation a policy issue involving acute moral conflict, but the Boyd Group is also a body made up of partisans representing organisations on both sides of the debate. Not surprisingly, the transformation of views predicted by some deliberative theorists has not occurred. However, deliberation within the Boyd Group has had the effect of softening some of the views and attitudes of the participants, has facilitated some compromises, and provides a useful guide to the methods available to those wishing to manage moral conflict.
The author would like to acknowledge the financial support of the Centre for Animals and Social Justice, and the provision of a period of research leave by the University of Leicester.
CitationGlobal Journal of Animal Law, 2017, 5(1), pp. 79-100
Author affiliation/Organisation/COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, ARTS AND HUMANITIES/School of History, Politics and International Relations
- AM (Accepted Manuscript)