1 / 17

The Ethics of Agricultural Biotech: Lessons for Nanotech?

The Ethics of Agricultural Biotech: Lessons for Nanotech?. Jeffrey Burkhardt Ethics & Policy Program Institute of Food & Agricultural Sciences University of Florida. Why AgBiotech Ethics?. Nature of the technology Use of the technology has consequences

ellenburg
Download Presentation

The Ethics of Agricultural Biotech: Lessons for Nanotech?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Ethics of Agricultural Biotech: Lessons for Nanotech? Jeffrey Burkhardt Ethics & Policy Program Institute of Food & Agricultural Sciences University of Florida

  2. Why AgBiotech Ethics? • Nature of the technology • Use of the technology has consequences • People have different values & priorities • Conflicts & arguments Ethics explains/critiques arguments

  3. Arenas of Ethical Discourse/Debate • Intrinsic arguments • Consequentialist arguments • Rights/consent arguments • Structural/ Procedural arguments

  4. Intrinsic Arguments Biotech is unethical because of what it is • Biotechnology is “playing God” • Interfering in God’s design is wrong • Biotechnology is unnatural • Crossing species boundaries is wrong • Creating life-forms nature could not have made is wrong Counter: Biotech is no different than plant breeding, etc.

  5. Consequentialist Arguments Biotech is unethical because of its effects Human Health: • Risks to human health – chronic problems, acute allergic reactions, synergistic interactions • We owe it to people not to harm them or place them at risk Counter: Biotech is safe • The benefits outweigh any risks

  6. Consequentialist Arguments Biotech is unethical because of its effects Environmental: • Risks to species, ecosystems, potential damage to agriculture itself • We owe future generations (or nature itself) to not place ecosystems at risk Counter: Biotech is better than alternatives • The benefits outweigh the risks

  7. Consequentialist Arguments Biotech is unethical because of its effects Social: • Threatens small farms, developing nations • Harming small farms and indigenous agricultural systems is unfair Counter: Biotech is better than alternatives • Benefits outweigh the harms • New technology leads to “structural adjustments”

  8. Rights/Consent Arguments Biotech food violates people’s rights • Biotech (GM) foods have been “smuggled” into the food system • Some people object to GM foods • People have a right to choose what they eat • We must respect people’s rights Counter: Biotech food is safe • It is “unreasonable” to object to GM foods

  9. Structural/Procedural Arguments BIO: The SYSTEM of R&D, tech transfer, intellectual property, etc. is unethical • BIO is global and growing in power • BIO is an increasingly concentrated enterprise (monopolized) • BIO has co-opted public sector research • BIO is out of democratic control Counter: The SYSTEM is working

  10. Current Structure of AgBiotech Concentration of World Ag Inputs Market • 10 multinationals control 85% ag chemicals • 10 multinationals control 40% commercial seed industry • 4 multinationals control 80% of world grain trade • Same companies are in seed/chemicals and biotechnology

  11. AgBiotech Patents

  12. Control of Global Maize Market

  13. What Have We Learned? • Ongoing debates have not been resolved • Debates are not resolved via “facts” • Reasoned ethical critique has been met with sloganeering and PR campaigns

  14. Example of BIO’s response to ethical arguments

  15. Example of BIO’s response to ethical arguments

  16. What Have We Learned? • BIO has been unwilling to engage in systematic self-critique • Government is unwilling to engage in ethical examination beyond “risk- benefit” analysis • Technology marches on unfettered by a priori considerations of right & wrong

  17. What Have We Not Learned? How to internalize and institutionalize discussion of ethical issues and concerns before • Inventions are disclosed • Products are patented • Products are licensed for commercialization • Technology is adopted • Consequences (good and bad) become apparent

More Related