Ethics in the Organic Movement - Re-Thinking Organic Food and Farming in a Changing World - page 18

2.2.1.6 Final Observations on Worldviews and the IFOAM Principles

As expressed in the IFOAM Principles, these diverse views appeal to actors in the
organic movement to weigh their actions in terms of their lives, but also for human
generations and nature now and in the future. They focus on ecological dimensions
and invite respect for the needs of all others, without regard to religious or spiritual
persuasion. Consistent with this, and even though not specifically acknowledged,
they do not preclude more radical positions that subordinate the individual to
ecosystems (Stenmark 2004 , p. 104) such as deep ecology (Naess 1973 , 1989 ), eco-
feminism, new age movements (Krebs 1977 , p. 362), or cosmological interpretations
(Siep cited in Fenner 2010 , p. 169).
The ethical message of the Principles that captures an ecocentric/holistic per-
spective is best expressed with: “Fairness is characterized by equity, respect, justice
and stewardship of the shared world, both among people and in their relations to
other living beings” (IFOAM 2012 , p. 10). In this way, the IFOAM Principles
represent what Alrøe and Kristensen ( 2003 ) call a “systemic ethic”. This perspective
offers considerable freedom in designing alternative/organic agrofood systems. 14
Moreover, the IFOAM Principles offer an ethically based structure for evaluating
the organic agrofood chain as a whole (Comstock 1995 ). 15

2.2.2 Beyond Organic as a Moral Obligation

In addition to reflecting these worldviews, the IFOAM Principles stand as a moral
guide for all actors along the organic agrofood chain (IFOAM 2009 ). They offer
a deontological ethic (duty, obligation) that stipulates what is “right” and what is
“wrong” (Mepham 2001 ; Barnett et al. 2005 ; Padel and Gössinger 2008 ; Padel
et al. 2009 ) in different environments. Understanding the Principles exclusively as
deontological would not offer much room for a flexible interpretation of standards
and certifications schemes, or for addressing unforeseen situations in daily practice.
In this section, we therefore broaden the ethical perspective through a discussion
of four relevant ethical positions (deontology, consequentialism, moderate deontol-
ogy and virtue ethics) (Carruthers 2009 , p. 296) in organic. 16 This will help us to
deepen our understanding of the IFOAM Principles and how they might be applied
in organic decision making processes.

14 The ecocentric view is founded on the belief that 'our deepest moral guidance comes from
understanding nature and our 'natural' place in it' (Armstrong and Botzler 1993 , p. 54, cited in
Carruthers 2009 , p. 297).
15 In contrast, the definition of sustainable development in the Brundtland report (1987) is explicitly
anthropocentric (Shearman 1990 ; Rennings and Wiggering 1997 ), while others also identify partly
biocentric characteristics (Weinschenck 1994 ).