Framework for Re-thinking Ethics in the Organic Movement - Re-Thinking Organic Food and Farming in a Changing World - page 253

has historically characterized ethics in the organic movement (see Chap. 2 ) 3 ; and
continues to be relevant for understanding the more recent differentiation of values
with respect to what is called “conventionalization” (Darnhofer et al. 2010 )(see
Constance et al., Chap. 9 ) . The following describes our typology of ethical values
in the organic movement.
Nature and philosophy (Nature/Philo): Practicing organic involves a commit-
ment to participating in the cycles of nature and adapting an ecocentric/holistic and
philosophical, bio-dynamic or spiritual understanding of belonging to an organic
eco-community (cf. Bookchin 1982 , p. 46); this often includes support for small-
scale, family-based innovations (see also the collectivist-immaterial in Meeusen
et al. 2003 ). Organic is understood as a logo-poietic system i.e., self-organizing
(autopoiesis) that creates its meaning (logo) (Alrøe and Noe 2008 ) and is held
together through principles. This type also includes those actors who are more
spiritual (e.g., deep ecology) (Naess 1973 , 1986 ) or those for whom organic is in
harmony with religious views (Lockie et al. 2002 , p. 26).
Environment and protest (Enviro/Protest). Organic is fundamentally a protest by
farmers and environmental activists against industrialized agriculture and seen as a
means to support/sustain a healthy environment (Willock et al. 1999 ; Baker et al.
2004 ; De Wit and Verhoog 2007 ). Such actors often oppose the use of inorganic
fertilizer, synthetic pesticides, food additives or genetically modified organisms
(Alrøe and Noe 2008 ). The philosophical background of this group ranges from
pathocentrism to biocentrism (see Sect. 2.2.1 ) .
Economics and markets (Econo/Market): Organic is primarily for profit and
accepted primarily for individualist and materialist values (Meeusen et al. 2003 ).
Industrialized large-scale farmers, consumers, and retailers who reflect an anthro-
pocentric, utilitarian and hedonist orientation illustrate this type. Organic is seen as
part of the globalized market system that relies upon organic standards designed to
meet this economic niche (Alrøe and Noe 2008 ).
3 Alrøe & Noe's typology reveals similarities to that used by Memery and others (see Memery
et al. 2005 ). These typologies use three clusters: food quality and safety; human rights and ethical
trading; and, environmental (green) issues (see also Best 2008 ). Browne et al. ( 2000 ) apply also
three categories of consumers distinguishing the true ethical consumers described as consuming
primarily organic products; semi-ethical who will be sometimes and those who would be ethical
consumers if premiums are low and access was easy. This classification is close to that of Alrøe and
Noe, however differences exist specifically in defining the semi-ethical type. A further example to
classify ethics is that of the Ethical Matrix developed by Ben Mepham and Sandra Tomkins. The
matrix was originally applied for students in an educational context, to make an ethical assessment
about the impacts of certain choices in relation to food production. This concept is built on three
types of ethical reasoning in line with those of Barnett et al. ( 2005 ): (1) “Wellbeing” is related
to the concept of utilitarianism and consequentialism, which is close to the Econo/Market type;
(2) “Autonomy/Rights” refers to responsibilities and duties against others; and (3) Fairness/Justice
that appeals to exclude any unfair and hence unjust action. Thus, (2) and (3) are relevant for the