Of course, there are other ways meat (and other animal product) consumption could increase from well-intentioned EA interventions than just by saving lives or increasing incomes/āwealth. For example, interventions that involve subsidizing animal welfare improvements can carry this backfire risk.
Iām less worried about confusion with other problems, because they donāt come up as often, and researchers are more likely to account for them in animal welfare research anyway. All effects on nonhuman animals are usually omitted from analyses of interventions aimed specifically at helping humans, including GHD and CGRs. Itās worth reminding people of these backfire risks.
I could also argue that āthe meat eater problemā is just as ambiguous because it could easily be misinterpreted as just the problem that everyone all around the world eats meat in general.
I donāt think precision is necessarily the be all and end all of names ;).
Of course, there are other ways meat (and other animal product) consumption could increase from well-intentioned EA interventions than just by saving lives or increasing incomes/āwealth. For example, interventions that involve subsidizing animal welfare improvements can carry this backfire risk.
Iām less worried about confusion with other problems, because they donāt come up as often, and researchers are more likely to account for them in animal welfare research anyway. All effects on nonhuman animals are usually omitted from analyses of interventions aimed specifically at helping humans, including GHD and CGRs. Itās worth reminding people of these backfire risks.
Itās true.
I could also argue that āthe meat eater problemā is just as ambiguous because it could easily be misinterpreted as just the problem that everyone all around the world eats meat in general.
I donāt think precision is necessarily the be all and end all of names ;).