These are the 67 best and worst countries for animal rights

These are the 67 best and worst countries for animal rights

We all know by now that where a person is born can convey privileges – or vice versa. But what about animals? Their country of origin can make the difference between living a classy life with toys, a pet bed and even a wardrobe, or ending up on someone’s dinner plate.

Continue reading below

Our selected videos

Matthew Nash, researcher and co-founder of insurance comparison site The Swiftest, dived into animal rights in a study of the 67 best and worst countries for animal rights. “I’ve always been interested in animal rights,” Nash said. “I believe that animals are sentient beings. As a lifelong pet owner, I have bound deeply to animals that many pet owners can understand. This combined with my curiosity and interest in international animal rights laws brought me to the point where I would perform this profound research at a global level. ”

Related: California law seeks to improve conditions for pigs

Nash also wanted to look beyond pets like cats and dogs to the wider range of animals, including pets and wildlife. It reflects the nine factors he examined to manufacture the rights of his animal. Full emphasis was placed on recognizing animal senses, recognizing animal suffering, animal cruelty laws, and a national fur farming ban. Half-weighted factors were support for the universal declaration on animal welfare, meat consumption per capita. per capita, percentage of protected areas, pesticide consumption per acres of cropland and environmental performance index score.

A cat standing on a patterned rug.

The winners

It turns out that Luxembourg is the best place to be born in animal form. This small northwestern European country, bordering Belgium, France and Germany, scored 519.68 on the fastest animal rights index. The only place it faltered was in meat consumption – too much ham and blood sausage.

The UK, Austria, the Czech Republic and Belgium rounded out the top five. All met the fully weighted factors in the index. However, some had higher-than-average meat consumption, less soil classified as protected areas and / or a higher percentage of pesticide consumption per hectare. hectares of cultivated land. Interestingly, European countries had all 25 top positions, with the exception of New Zealand, which came in as number 18.

Nash is optimistic about improving conditions for animals. “Over the last twenty years or so, several countries have recognized that animals feel pain and are not just property,” he said. “Many countries have enacted animal welfare laws. We still have a long way to go globally, but we are slowly moving in the right direction in general.”

A white baby pig with black spots.

The losers

China was the clear loser with a score of 12.46. With some markets in China selling live frogs, foreskin for convenience, it is clear that many citizens have different attitudes towards animals. China also lacked some of the study’s fully weighted factors. The few points it received were for having a relatively low meat consumption per.

The other losers were Vietnam with 45.24 points, Iran with 71.4, Azerbaijan with 73.07 and Belarus with 105.65. Belarus has at least a fur ban. Nash said he was surprised at the lack of animal protection in some countries. “The bottom ten countries in my study had minimal laws regarding animal rights, while some had zero.”

A pile of skinned, living frogs.

What about the United States?

The United States scored in the bottom half of the index and came in as number 40 with 319.45 points. On the positive side, the United States has laws against animal cruelty, but lacks a national ban on fur farming and does not recognize animal sentiments at the federal level. It also scored among the highest for meat consumption per. person and the lowest percentage of protected areas. The United States scored just below Israel and just above Venezuela.

“As a U.S. citizen, I was surprised to find America ranked No. 40 out of 67 countries surveyed,” Nash said. “I had the impression that we like animals a lot as a country, which is partly true. In general, our pets are treated very well, which is not always the case for our pets and wildlife.”

Pet life

Swiftest’s animal rights index is broader than the cats and dogs many people have in their homes. Nash said his next study will focus on canines and be called the “best and worst countries for dogs.” While the United States did not do so well in the animal rights index, Nash believes that American dogs are doing quite well.

“I have had dogs in the United States and know that dogs are treated very well here,” he said. “If I were a dog, I would be most happy in the United States. America has amazing vets, lots of parks and trails to run and pick up, and lots of pet-friendly restaurants and hotels.” But the frontrunners in his new study so far show that the two best countries to be dog are Italy and New Zealand, which scored number 26 and 18 respectively in the animal rights index.

A dog standing on a bench in front of a large green plant.

To learn more about animal rights, The Swiftest proposes resources that include the ASPCA, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, and the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

Via The Swiftest

Pictures via Teresa Bergen / Inhabitat


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here