| Title |
Taxing Meat: Taking Responsibility for One’s Contribution to Antibiotic Resistance
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10806-017-9660-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alberto Giubilini, Patrick Birkl, Thomas Douglas, Julian Savulescu, Hannah Maslen |
| Abstract |
Antibiotic use in animal farming is one of the main drivers of antibiotic resistance both in animals and in humans. In this paper we propose that one feasible and fair way to address this problem is to tax animal products obtained with the use of antibiotics. We argue that such tax is supported both by (a) deontological arguments, which are based on the duty individuals have to compensate society for the antibiotic resistance to which they are contributing through consumption of animal products obtained with the use of antibiotics; and (b) a cost-benefit analysis of taxing such animal products and of using revenue from the tax to fund alternatives to use of antibiotics in animal farming. Finally, we argue that such a tax would be fair because individuals who consume animal products obtained with the use of antibiotics can be held morally responsible, i.e. blameworthy, for their contribution to antibiotic resistance, in spite of the fact that each individual contribution is imperceptible. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 40 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 14 | 35% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 13% |
| Curaçao | 1 | 3% |
| Bahamas | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Ireland | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 15 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 36 | 90% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 5% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 3% |
| Scientists | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Luxembourg | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 86 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 13% |
| Researcher | 9 | 10% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 23 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 10 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 9% |
| Environmental Science | 6 | 7% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 23 | 26% |
| Unknown | 26 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 134. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 July 2023.
All research outputs
#300,756
of 24,950,117 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics
#8
of 411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,851
of 339,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,950,117 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 411 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 339,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.