Ethics of Food Production and Consumption - The Oxford Topic of Food, Politics, and Society - page 235

as either irrational or lazy are often barriers for a fruitful understanding of the motives
of consumers. As a consequence, differentiation of food purchasing through labeling
and certification allows at least some consumers to express ethical concerns through
their purchasing choices (Clough, this volume).
With respect to the issues mentioned, science and technology can work in both ways,
either reducing the labor force by focusing on monocultural plantations or encouraging
social and biological biodiversity by enlightening the labor force by making the farm
work more pleasant, more productive, and less tiresome. There are good examples of
how “external science,” indigenous technological development, and cash-crop orienta-
tion integrate to increase harvest quality and quantity, partly for the market and partly
for the subsistence of farmers. For example in the Kilombero Valley, Tanzania, rice is a
cash crop as well as a subsistence crop; the subsistence crop serves as an income genera-
tor for technological investments in the cash crop.
Many ethicists argue that, because of these concerns, business as usual, in the sense
of continuing the current agricultural and food system, is not possible anymore. The
socioeconomic issues are very urgent because they threaten peaceful cooperation. For
many, it is not acceptable that approximately 2% of the global population produces food
and more than 12% is jobless, living in slums.
Approaches and Concepts
Principles, values, and practices
In food ethics, the foregoing issues are analyzed via various approaches and concepts
that are either taken from general academic ethics (due to the fact that most food ethi-
cists have an academic background or come from other disciplines, such as philosophy
of technology and social philosophy), or inspired by the actions and thoughts of people
caring for animals, nature, or farming.
In academic ethics one can distinguish between foundational or principalist posi-
tions, value-oriented positions, and pragmatist positions. In the first approach, the
idea is that ethics should start by identifying and justifying fundamental principles and
obligations that can claim universal respect and agreement. On the basis of these prin-
ciples (foundations), people can than try to tackle more practical problems by paying
attention to local circumstances and stakeholders. The ideal principles function as a
foundation but also as criteria that identify the main bones of contention and best solu-
tions. Utilitarians like Peter Singer and Mason (2006) or deontologists like Tom Regan
(1983) argue in this way. Singer favors a calculation of costs and benefits of the conse-
quences of an action; Regan, stressing rights, argues for not interfering with animals
(“abolitionism”) on the basis of the right or principle of animal integrity. The approach
called “ethical matrix” synthesizes deontological principles such as autonomy and jus-
tice with utilitarian values of doing no harm and doing well in mapping approaches to a