How biotechnology regulation sets a risk/ethics boundary

Agriculture and Human Values 14 (1):29-43 (1997)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In public debate over agricultural biotechnology, at issue hasbeen its self-proclaimed aim of further industrializingagriculture. Using languages of ’risk‘, critics and proponentshave engaged in an implicit ethics debate on the direction oftechnoscientific development. Critics have challenged thebiotechnological R&D agenda for attributing socio-agronomicproblems to genetic deficiencies, while perpetuating the hazardsof intensive monoculture. They diagnosed ominous links betweentechnological dependency and tangible harm from biotechnologyproducts.In response to scientific and public concerns, theEuropean Community enacted precautionary legislation for theintentional release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Inits implementation, choices for managing and investigatingbiotechnological risk involve an implicit environmental ethics.Yet the official policy language downplays the inherent valuejudgments, by portraying risk regulation as a matter of’objective‘ science.In parallel with safety regulation, thestate has devised an official bioethics that judges where to’draw the line‘ in applying biotechnological knowledge, as ifthe science itself were value-free. Bioethics may also judge howto ’balance‘ risks and benefits, as if their definition were notan issue. This form of ethics serves to compensate for theunacknowledged value-choices and institutional commitmentsalready embedded in R&D priorities.Thus the state separates’risk‘ and ’ethics‘, while assigning both realms to specialists.The risk/ethics boundary encourages public deference to theexpert assessments of both safety regulators and professionalethicists. Biotechnology embodies a contentious model of controlover nature and society, yet this issue becomes displaced andfragmented into various administrative controls. At stake arethe prospects for democratizing the problem-definitions thatguide R&D priorities.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,593

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Boundary.Achille C. Varzi - 2013 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Social boundary mechanisms.Charles Tilly - 2004 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 34 (2):211-236.
Biotechnology and the Environment.Matti Häyry & Tuija Takala - 1999 - The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 1:169-178.
Epistemology and Risk Management.Nassim N. Taleb & Avital Pilpel - 2007 - Risk and Regulation 13:6--7.
Life, death, genes, and ethics: biotechnology and bioethics.Maxwell John Charlesworth - 1989 - Crows Nest, NSW: ABC Enterprises for the Australian Broadcasting.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-30

Downloads
36 (#385,000)

6 months
4 (#319,344)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity.Ulrich Beck, Mark Ritter & Jennifer Brown - 1993 - Environmental Values 2 (4):367-368.
Knowledges in Context.Brian Wynne - 1991 - Science, Technology and Human Values 16 (1):111-121.
Getting Behind Environmental Ethics.Robin Grove-White & Bronislaw Szerszynski - 1992 - Environmental Values 1 (4):285 - 296.
Biotechnology and the Future of World Agriculture.Henk Hobbelink - 1993 - Environmental Values 2 (1):83-84.

View all 6 references / Add more references