Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Four Legs Better A Post-Speciesist Critical Discourse Analysis of Non-Human Animals’ Construction in Contemporary FAO Discourse

Freeman, Louis LU (2025) UTVK03 20251
Sociology
Abstract
This thesis examines the ways in which the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation
(FAO) constructs non-human animals within contemporary development discourse, while
analysing the consistency of these constructions with rights-based approaches within
development, the findings of the field of critical animal studies, and the interests of private
stakeholders in FAO operations. In spite of the purported commitment to evidence-based practice
by development studies as a scientific field of study, and despite the proud history of the
discipline of expanding moral consideration to historically marginalised groups and
communities, non-human animals are continually left outside of the circle of empathy when it
comes to... (More)
This thesis examines the ways in which the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation
(FAO) constructs non-human animals within contemporary development discourse, while
analysing the consistency of these constructions with rights-based approaches within
development, the findings of the field of critical animal studies, and the interests of private
stakeholders in FAO operations. In spite of the purported commitment to evidence-based practice
by development studies as a scientific field of study, and despite the proud history of the
discipline of expanding moral consideration to historically marginalised groups and
communities, non-human animals are continually left outside of the circle of empathy when it
comes to rights-based approaches to development, irregardless of their central role across
developmental programmes, particularly by FAO. Through Critical Discourse Analysis of key
contemporary FAO policy documents, and using a framework of rights-based approaches to
development and critical animal studies insights, this study reveals three significant patterns
within the discourse of the FAO as an organisation. Firstly, non-human animals are consistently
constructed through economic instrumentalisation, valued primarily as "multi-functioning assets"
and measured through productivity metrics rather than as sentient subjects. Secondly, discourse
within FAO documents demonstrates strong alignment with market logic, emphasising private
sector partnerships, "sustainable intensification," and efficiency gains that mirror commercial
interests. Thirdly, systematic exclusions pervade FAO language, with minimal recognition of
animal agency, individual experiences, or rights-based frameworks despite acknowledgment of
animal sentience. These findings reveal fundamental inconsistencies between development's
stated commitment to rights-based approaches for marginalized subjects and the continued
instrumentalisation of animals. This study contributes to understanding how institutional
discourse creates socially constructed limits to moral consideration within development and
suggests that including animal rights perspectives could advance more comprehensive and
ethically grounded development practice which in turn could lead to a better world for all. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Freeman, Louis LU
supervisor
organization
course
UTVK03 20251
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Critical Discourse Analysis, Development Studies, Animal Rights, Critical Animal Studies, FAO, Rights-Based Approaches
language
English
additional info
Wrote this on the road, and it really shows!
id
9215216
date added to LUP
2025-11-11 10:34:12
date last changed
2025-11-11 10:34:12
@misc{9215216,
  abstract     = {{This thesis examines the ways in which the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation
(FAO) constructs non-human animals within contemporary development discourse, while
analysing the consistency of these constructions with rights-based approaches within
development, the findings of the field of critical animal studies, and the interests of private
stakeholders in FAO operations. In spite of the purported commitment to evidence-based practice
by development studies as a scientific field of study, and despite the proud history of the
discipline of expanding moral consideration to historically marginalised groups and
communities, non-human animals are continually left outside of the circle of empathy when it
comes to rights-based approaches to development, irregardless of their central role across
developmental programmes, particularly by FAO. Through Critical Discourse Analysis of key
contemporary FAO policy documents, and using a framework of rights-based approaches to
development and critical animal studies insights, this study reveals three significant patterns
within the discourse of the FAO as an organisation. Firstly, non-human animals are consistently
constructed through economic instrumentalisation, valued primarily as "multi-functioning assets"
and measured through productivity metrics rather than as sentient subjects. Secondly, discourse
within FAO documents demonstrates strong alignment with market logic, emphasising private
sector partnerships, "sustainable intensification," and efficiency gains that mirror commercial
interests. Thirdly, systematic exclusions pervade FAO language, with minimal recognition of
animal agency, individual experiences, or rights-based frameworks despite acknowledgment of
animal sentience. These findings reveal fundamental inconsistencies between development's
stated commitment to rights-based approaches for marginalized subjects and the continued
instrumentalisation of animals. This study contributes to understanding how institutional
discourse creates socially constructed limits to moral consideration within development and
suggests that including animal rights perspectives could advance more comprehensive and
ethically grounded development practice which in turn could lead to a better world for all.}},
  author       = {{Freeman, Louis}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Four Legs Better A Post-Speciesist Critical Discourse Analysis of Non-Human Animals’ Construction in Contemporary FAO Discourse}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}