By Dr Harriet Clarke
Social Policy, Sociology and Criminology
Social science researchers often consider whose voices could advocate for social change. So – and do bear with me – do social scientists have any business asking, ‘Can ‘listening’ to non-human animals support our role in building better lives for all living beings’?
Colleagues and I answer “yes, we do”, based on current research with people who work with horses (in sports/leisure and equine-assisted services such as psychotherapy) and our involvement with Balsall Heath City Farm.
Olympic horse sports provide a useful example to highlight why.
If horses could speak
Whilst not an inclination limited to national borders, the British narrative that “we are a nation of animal lovers” was encapsulated by Queen Elizabeth II’s fondness for horses (and dogs) and support of animal welfare organisations; King Charles has taken on her mantle as patron of such organisations including the RSPCA.
British Equestrianism, the week before the Paris Olympics opened, produced a counter-narrative.
Charlotte Dujardin (pictured above), a six-time (3 Gold) Olympic medal winner, was withdrawn from the dressage in Versailles as she is being investigated by the international body for equestrianism, the FEI. Dujardin’s suspension follows video evidence of her ‘training’ a horse in a way, as the FEI states, contrary to the principles of horse welfare. This is one example of incidents impacting on horses, and on the international sport (and business) of equestrianism; notably, following welfare concerns in the Modern Pentathlon at Tokyo 2020, show jumping has been removed (so that sport will be horse-free in 2028). Whether horse welfare concerns are endemic within horse sports is a matter of much debate. Dujardin has herself actively advocated for better horse welfare by setting an example in horse management, and as an ambassador for Brooke, a UK-based international equid charity. This sat harmoniously with the ‘nation of animal lovers’ narrative.
But, if we could talk to Olympic-level horses – themselves athletes, not of their choosing – what would they tell us? Would they say they love to train, that they perform in synergy with their humans? We can, at a minimum, say that this is objectively not always the case for horses and could be a deflecting narrative by humans: straight from the horses’ mouths, there can be physical ‘communication’ (such as blue tongues) when – despite welfare guidelines – horses are trained in ways producing pain and physical damage.
If horse related activities fail to retain public support (known as ‘social license to operate) the livelihoods that depend on them may vanish. Welfare in horse sport is not a new concern and people involved fear competitions are under threat. The sector is aware that a recent animal welfare change in the UK is that, following the removal of public support, wild animals can no longer be used in circus acts. Zoos were losing public support, but they have regained and retained it by repurposing their work and attending to welfare (and conservation, research and education). The FEI have been working hard to advance standards for the competition horse. If attempts to maintain sports as they are fall short, they will have to be revised around the wellbeing needs of horses. Might horse displays (such as at the ‘Horse of the Year Show’) also ultimately come under threat?
‘One welfare’
Welfare concerns are not only present in the context of competition – though competition with high-asset-value horses may produce specific risks that Dujardin and others have tried to counter, e.g. demonstrating that horses should be turned out into fields and not kept perpetually ‘wrapped up in cotton wool’ (or horse rugs!) in stables. Beyond horse sports and displays, equids are involved in ‘equine assisted psychotherapy’ and other developmental activities where – whatever the ‘asset-value’ of the horse, their species-specific welfare needs are fundamentally the same.
We are currently talking to those operating services with horses and have been told of the desire and intention to ‘hear’ and respond to what horses need and want: this is for the horse, and because the horse needs to be well to contribute to human wellbeing. This brings us close to the notion that your wellbeing and my wellbeing are interlinked, often expressed within forms of Indigenous knowledge, and as a global value (linking animal welfare to human wellbeing) through the concept of ‘One Welfare’.
In our social and environmental contexts, we need to address the links between human and non-human wellbeing for the benefit of each. This is expressed in learning spaces such as Balsall Heath City Farm, where birds, ‘small furries’, goats and sheep provide a sense of connection with the animal world for adults and children in the city. While there is no space for ponies on welfare grounds, I’ve heard evidence that even the humble guinea pig can help young people self-regulate as they connect with another being. I recently held an event at Balsall Heath City Farm (July 17th, 2024), where people came together to share our experiences of thinking about care, welfare and wellbeing across different domains of human-animal interaction (including city farm provision, equine assisted welfare, and assistance dogs). This experience provided some interesting messages for the ‘human’ social sciences.
‘Interspecies learning’
Our work so far highlights that as well as helping to shine a light on how the welfare needs of animals are considered when they are in our service, looking at human-non-human interactions can contribute to our learning about our human world (traditionally the focus in the social sciences).
As a researcher (and actually as a horse rider and psychotherapist too), I am supported through knowledge about human-animal interactions to examine myself and my limitations. For instance, learning from Dujardin’s suspension – and services involving animals –helps me reflect on my standards of behaviour when trying to achieve my professional goals. We humans are animals, so what narratives can (or do) we construct to suggest we adequately care for our co-workers (or indeed others more distant from us)? It reminds us that expressing care or even love for others (human or non-human) and valuing their contribution does not mean we adequately address their needs. Expressions of valuing the other might mask some welfare concerns and power imbalances in our relationships. This points to the need to collectively commit to considering the wellbeing of both humans and non-humans in our actions and decisions – individually and collectively – and from a research and policy perspective tools such as the ‘one welfare’ approach can support advancing this agenda.
Work mentioned here is supported by funds from within the University, and undertaken with Fiona Carmichael (BBS), Emerald Henderson and Sheona Goodyear (both SoE), and with Balsall Heath City Farm.
- Find out more about Dr Harriet Clarke
- Back to Social Sciences Birmingham
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the University of Birmingham.