Data and Statistics

With a share of about 60% of all online searches, Google is easily the world's most-used search engine. And I would say with good reason, because they offer a wide variety of topic-specific searches and the ability to create "custom search engines." HRC has now harnessed the power of Google by creating two custom search engines, one on farm animals searching sites related to the U.S. Department Agriculture and another that searches the abstracts and full texts of major animal-related journals. We're considering other custom search engine ideas and would also welcome suggestions.

In my last post, I noted that a major concern of researchers is that survey respondents are willing to provide opinions on issues about which they have little knowledge. This is one example of how the research process itself can influence our understanding of the people whose attitudes and behavior we are studying. The simple act of asking people questions becomes more complex when you consider that the respondent's opinion may not have existed prior to that person hearing the question.

Most of our readers have likely heard of the recent study estimating that 21% of the world's mammals are on the path to extinction. Due to lack of data, this number could be as high as 36%. About 40% of species are threatened specifically because of habitat loss due to human activities, according to the Red List of Threatened Species. This is alarming, to say the least. Not only because the loss of these species would be a catastrophe in its own right, but also because the loss of biodiversity would wreak havoc on the world's remaining species. Although politics and economics and war dominate the headlines, there can be no doubt that animal protection is an urgent issue.

This past weekend I was one of the presenters at "Speaking Their Truth," the 23rd Annual International Compassionate Living Festival. The topic was economics as it applies to animal protection campaigns, and our panel covered a range of different issues relevant to economic matters. Here is a summary of my part of the presentation, which touched on capitalism, current global trends in animal consumption, and using economic data to measure the success of programs and campaigns for animals.

In my last post, I asked whether or not it's presumptuous for animal advocates (who are most often human) to attempt to quantify suffering for different species and animals in diverse situations. It may seem reasonable to generalize that mammals are more capable of suffering than insects, for instance, although some people would argue the point. Getting more specific than that, like by suggesting that "battery hens" suffer more than shelter animals, would certainly generate more controversy. So, can we quantify animal suffering?