1 The Ethics of Agricultural Animal Biotechnology Robert K. Streiffer and John Basl 1. Introduction Recent biotechnology research includes the development of genetically engineered animals and cloned animals for use as food or breeding stock in agriculture. Such research raises important ethical issues regarding the welfare of animals in agriculture and animal agriculture’s environmental impact. The livestock sector’s massive scale—fifty six billion land animals are consumed each year 1 --means that several routine agricultural practices that are detrimental to animal welfare or to the environment pose some of the most pressing global ethical issues the human species has ever encountered. An application of biotechnology to animals in agriculture (animal biotech for short) can either mitigate or exacerbate these problems. In Section 2, after discussing the philosophical literature on animal welfare, we discuss the prospects for ameliorating or exacerbating animal welfare issues with animal biotech. In particular, we focus on how diminishing the cognitive capacities of animals in agriculture might improve or harm their welfare. In Section 3, we turn to animal biotech and the environment. After explaining how agriculture contributes to environmental problems, we look at how a particular genetically engineered animal, the Enviropig, might alter the environmental impacts of pig agriculture. In doings so we develop a framework for thinking about other cases. 2. Animal Biotech and Animal Welfare Theories of Animal Welfare One way an application of animal biotech can have a morally relevant impact is by its effect on an animal’s welfare (its well-being, quality of life, or how well its life is going). Insofar as an application of animal biotech provides a net increase of animal welfare compared to current practices, there is a moral reason in favor of adopting that application. And, of course, insofar as an application decreases animal welfare compared to current practices, there is a moral reason against adopting that application. However, to assess the welfare impact of particular applications of animal biotech, we must know what it means to improve animal welfare. This requires that we understand both what constitutes animal welfare and what constitutes an improvement in it. There are three types of general views about welfare: Mentalistic views, Desire- Satisfaction views, and Objective List views. According to Mentalistic views of welfare, welfare is solely a function of the mental life of an individual. Negative mental states—such as pain, suffering, and distress—count against an individual’s welfare, while positive mental states—such as pleasure, enjoyment, and contentment—count in favor of an individual’s welfare. One prominent problem with Mentalistic conceptions of welfare is that they ignore the possibility that whether or not one’s desires are satisfied can have an impact on 1 UN FAO, http://faostat.fao.org