COUNCIL FORFOR AGRICULTURALAGRICULTURAL SCIENCE SCIENCE AND AND TECHNOLOGY—1 TECHNOLOGY NUMBER 29 FEBRUARY 2005 AGRICULTURAL ETHICS TASK FORCE MEMBERS: Jeffrey Burkhardt, Chair, Department of Food and Resource Eco- INTRODUCTION commented on the importance It is widely known that nomics, University of Florida, Gainesville; Gary of agricultural knowledge in agriculture has a long history. Comstock, Department of Philosophy and Reli- the quest for the “good life” by Starting approximately 12,000 gion, North Carolina State University, Raleigh; the individual and the polity. years ago, the domestication Peter G. Hartel, Department of Crop and Soil The fundamental value of ag- of plants and animals began riculture was highlighted by Sciences, University of Georgia, Athens; Paul independently in several dif- Enlightenment thinkers from ferent places, including cen- B. Thompson, Department of Philosophy, Michi- John Locke to Thomas ters in West Asia, East Asia, gan State University, East Lansing; REVIEWERS: Jefferson, who underscored Central America, and South Maarten J. Chrispeels, Center for Molecular Ag- the political, economic, and America. Domestication also riculture, University of California–San Diego; philosophical importance of may have occurred in other Charles C. Muscoplat, College of Agricultural, “tillers of the soil” (Spiegel locations, although convinc- Food and Environmental Sciences, University of 1991). In the United States, ing archeological evidence problems faced by farmers Minnesota, St. Paul; Robert Streiffer, Department has not been found. In the became the focus of the nine- domestication process, hu- of Philosophy, Department of Medical History and teenth-century Populists, and mans manipulated animals, Bioethics, Department of Medical Sciences, Uni- their legacy continues today. plants, and the environment in versity of Wisconsin Suffice it to say that agricul- various ways to increase the ture has long been the focus of availability of the desirable species and desired traits of questions about values, priorities, practices, and policies. these species (Anderson n.d.). In the late twentieth century, systematic thinking It is less widely known that religious, political, and about the values and norms associated with the food sys- philosophical reflection on agriculture and the environ- tem—farming, resource management, food processing, ment also has a long history. Early in the Hebrew Bible distribution, trade, and consumption—came to be referred (or Old Testament), God promised the children of Israel to as agricultural ethics. Agricultural ethics incorporates an abundance of land flowing with milk and honey (Deut. elements of philosophical ethical analysis with concerns 3:8; 15:4); the Bible also prohibited the acquisition of about particular issue areas that arise in connection with small farms by large landowners (Lev. 25:13, as noted the food system. As practiced by philosophers and schol- in Spiegel 1991). Centuries later, the Greek philosopher ars from religious studies, the social sciences, and the ag- Plato discussed the importance of reconstructing agricul- ricultural disciplines themselves, agricultural ethics has ture after the mythical Deluge, and his student Aristotle grown from the work of a handful of philosophically trained individuals in U.S. land-grant institutions to a This material is based upon work supported by the Unit- large, worldwide collection of academics, scholars, farm- ed States Department of Agriculture under Grant No. 2004- ers, policymakers, and activists, thinking and writing 34531-14969. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or about these issues. In this paper, the authors examine the recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect views of the USDA or nature of ethics as applied to agriculture (as well as the the Iowa State University. environment), discuss briefly how ethical concepts and COUNCIL FOR AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—2 tools can address several issue areas in the food system, reflection even by believers, are ethically wrong: torture, comment on how consideration of agricultural ethics genocide, and suicide are prime examples. Thus, al- might be institutionalized, and provide a glossary to help though many ethical prescriptions and proscriptions may be taught and fostered through religions, there are ethi- those interested in these issues navigate through the topic cal “rights” and “wrongs” that are independent of any of ethics as applied to the world of agriculture. religious tradition. Historically, some thinkers have tried to base ethics ETHICS1 on science (see Huxley [1888] 2001). The sciences are Ethics, simply put, refers to the rightness or wrong- descriptive disciplines aimed at explaining and predict- ness of actions. Persons, groups, or institutions act ethi- ing natural laws and regularities that in fact govern the cally when they do “the right thing,” and act wrongly behavior and relationships of objects in the natural world. when they do “the wrong thing.” Obviously, one of the Ethics, on the other hand, is a normative discipline aimed first problems encountered when thinking about ethics is at prescribing conduct and articulating moral rules or “What makes actions right or wrong?” This thinking is principles that ought to govern human behavior. There referred to as the problem of finding ethical standards or are scientific questions one can answer without having criteria. to think about ethics at all. Although few ethical ques- In some people’s minds, right and wrong are defined tions can be resolved without accurate scientific informa- by the laws a country enacts or adopts to protect life, lib- tion, ethics cannot be based solely on science (see Hume erty, or property. But the law is not always a good guide [1777] 1975). As most contemporary ethicists would put to ethics, because some activities are legal yet unethical it, one cannot derive “ought” from “is.” Whether the is- (e.g., occasional psychological abuse of one’s spouse) sue is the legitimacy of government farm subsidies, the whereas other activities are illegal and yet not unethical role of the international community in addressing issues (e.g., driving over the speed limit in an emergency). Ethi- of world hunger, or the safety of genetically modified cal criteria are distinct from the law, although laws fre- organisms (GMOs), ethics demands that people come to quently follow or embody certain ethical criteria (e.g., answers about what they ought or ought not do, what it laws against murder or against “cruel and unusual pun- is right or wrong to do. ishment”). Now it is true that people have different opinions on Other people find the basis of ethics in customs or farm subsidies, solving world hunger, and GMOs. When culture. But there are things certain people condone that people disagree about such issues, they invariably invoke are not ethically permissible on any rational criteria (e.g., arguments, explicitly or implicitly, to support their opin- torturing some citizens for the entertainment of the masses ions. Part of ethics, therefore, is the study of arguments— or engaging in slave trade). There also are activities some premises, conclusions, and the validity of moving from people engage in that are culturally “wrong” but not un- premises a, b, and c to conclusion d. Ultimately, a major ethical (e.g., not removing one’s shoes when entering a goal of agricultural ethics is to discover or develop clear, traditional Japanese home). Clearly, there are connec- noncontradictory, comprehensive, and universal stan- tions between a culture’s customs and ethics, but general dards for judging right and wrong actions and policies. ethical standards cannot be based on customs. Customs By analyzing arguments and positions on ethical issues, and cultures vary tremendously around the world, and one begins to develop a better understanding of the cri- ethical criteria should be, at least in general terms, teria or standards that should govern one’s actions and “universal.” lead to judgments about what counts as ethically right and Yet other people want to base ethics on religion. wrong. Historically, ethics and religion have been aligned closely because the ethical values of many cultures have evolved A METHOD FOR ADDRESSING ETHICAL within religious traditions. These traditions have been ISSUES2 prime repositories, incubators, and champions of virtue and moral character. But what is ethically right or wrong Ethical arguments often center on “harms.” People is not necessarily identical to what a particular religion are concerned about actual or possible harm to persons or other living beings from a given action or policy. teaches. Indeed, religions conflict with one another over ethical obligations; for example, Hindus believe it is ethi- Harmful actions may or may not be justified. Whether cally wrong to kill cattle, whereas the Judeo–Christian harms are justified is a question that ethicists try to an- swer by working methodically through a series of steps: tradition has no such prohibition (Linzey and Yamamoto 1998). Moreover, throughout history, religions have • What is the harm under consideration? How signifi- called on their adherents to engage in actions that, on cant (tangible or intangible, severe or trivial) is the 1This section is based on Comstock 2000a, “An Alternative 2This section is based on Comstock 2001, “Ethics and Genetically Ethic for Animals,” and is used with permission of the publisher. Modified Foods,”