Ethics of Food Production and Consumption - The Oxford Topic of Food, Politics, and Society - page 233

to climate change, approximately 18% due to its methane emissions (Steinfeld 2006);
this issue will be discussed more extensively in Case Studies in Food Ethical Issues. It
also depletes finite resources; it is responsible for degradation of the soil by over inten-
sification and for deforestation (in particular in Latin America and Southeast Asia); it
pollutes water by manure and chemicals and increases antibiotic resistance in humans
by abuse of antibiotics in intensive animal factories. Fishery and aquaculture empty the
seas quickly. All these material and immaterial costs are externalized and the burden is
put on the shoulders of taxpayers and nature (Tansey 2008).
Fourth, human use of animals raises other ethical issues, in particular in intense sys-
tems; the animals, not having a voice, endure pain and suffering by being confined in
very small pens, inhumane forms of slaughtering, and degrading treatment as mere
objects; approximately 55 billion land animals are slaughtered every year. In the west-
ern countries, there is a growing concern and sensibility for the abuse of animals,
which gives rise to strong NGOs and sometimes governmental measures, and increas-
ing intensification will not make these concerns disappear (Palmer 2011; see also Case
Studies in Food Ethical Issues). At the same time, livestock remain the mainstay of some
of the poorest people on earth, a vital component of mixed farming systems for small
landholders (Mehta-Bhatt and Ficarelli, this volume).
Fifth, in terms of economic impacts, the current food system with its food and
agro-monopolies is an important part of the global trend of the establishment of
monopolies that standardize production and decrease the number of organisms used
for agriculture, reducing agrobiodiversity and increasing the risk of outbreaks of dis-
eases and pests. These companies and monopolistic networks operating on a global free
market are more powerful than individual states; large shareholders speculate with food
and make the food trade a casino, with all the risks for food security and price stability
(Nestle 2002; De Schutter 2010). For many it has unacceptable consequences that food is
treated as a mere commodity, just like cars and computers. First, the commodification of
food has unfair distributive consequences: it increases the gap between rich and poor by
suppressing poor farmers and even chasing them from their land in exchange for large
plantations that are managed mechanically. Prices show huge fluctuations, which makes
it difficult for a farmer producing for the market to plan ahead. Moreover, high prices,
for the most part, do not translate into high revenues for farmers, but low prices paid to
farmers do not necessarily mean low prices for consumers. Sometimes, the worst situa-
tion happens: The few rich farmers get the highest prices, and consumers in poor areas,
when they are living in towns, have to pay much more. The large farmers get richer, the
smaller get poorer, and in the end, the small farmers have to give up and become jobless
slum inhabitants. The fluctuations also stir up speculation which often has disastrous
consequences. Second, commodification degrades and humiliates farmers and their
communities, harvests, animals, and land; these commodities are only there for use and
profit, which is, for producers and consumers, often the principal motive in engaging
with food: Can I make a profit from it? Respectively, where can I buy the cheapest food?
(Shiva 2008). This system degrades everything connected with food: It makes it grades
of food lower compared with the grades it could get according to a normative view on