Agriculture and Human Values 15 (3):243-252 (1998)

Abstract
Amongst the environmental and social externalities generated by Australian agriculture are a number of risks both to the health and safety of communities living near sites of agricultural production, and to the end consumers of agricultural products. Responses to these potential risks – and to problems of environmental sustainability more generally – have included a number of programs to variously: define “best-practice” for particular industries; implement “Quality Assurance” procedures; and encourage the formation of self-help community “Landcare” groups. Taken together, these programs appear to deal comprehensively with both the social and environmental risks associated with agricultural production and products. However, these programs may also be interpreted as strategies that actually encourage the further intensification of agriculture, while attempting to reassure consumers that their food is safe and that farmers are doing “all they can” to protect the environment. Investigation of the Australian cotton and beef industries illustrates a number of strategies that have become evident between farmers, agri-science agencies, and the retail sector to manage these risks and define good farming practices in ways that satisfy their own perceived interests. Contrary to the image, therefore, of “green consumption” that is emerging as an integrated concern for “clean” (and thereby “healthy”) and sustainably produced foods, it appears that mainstream agricultural industries have bifurcated these concerns in ways that distract attention from production and processing methods, leaving conflict over on-farm production methods a characteristic only of those industries believed to have direct health impacts on nearby communities
Keywords Australian agriculture  Best-practice  Environment  Knowledge construction  Landcare  Quality assurance  Risk
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2004
DOI 10.1023/A:1007455700259
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,290
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity.Ulrich Beck, Mark Ritter & Jennifer Brown - 1993 - Environmental Values 2 (4):367-368.
Against Method.P. Feyerabend - 1975 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 26 (4):331-342.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Environmental Care in Agriculture: A Social Perspective. [REVIEW]Melania Salazar-Ordóñez & Samir Sayadi - 2011 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (3):243-258.
Crop Biotechnology for the Environment?Sven Ove Hansson & Karin Joelsson - 2013 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (4):759-770.
Shrinking Danish Agriculture.Jørgen S. Nørgård & Bente L. Christensen - 1989 - Agriculture and Human Values 6 (1-2):110-116.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-11-23

Total views
49 ( #233,102 of 2,518,865 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #407,861 of 2,518,865 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes