Food Ethics

Recently, a family of views has emerged which endorses animal protectionist goals—like rejecting speciesism and reducing animal suffering—while maintaining that the diet most consistent with these aims includes at least some animal products. For example, some people contend that there is nothing morally objectionable about eating meat that will otherwise go to waste provided that one is not economically supporting industrial animal agriculture. In this paper, I argue that we have plausible character-based reasons to avoid many animal products, even those (...) that one has not purchased and that may otherwise be wasted. When certain speciesist norms are in place, conceptualizing only some animal flesh as food typically involves a morally objectionable prejudice—a prejudice that makes one’s character worse. Attending to our moral character involves cultivating certain perceptual and emotional responsive dispositions, and I argue that a rejection of speciesism should involve cultivating an aversion to things like animal flesh and skin. If we take seriously the idea that we should have the right attitudes and moral-perceptual responses toward other creatures, we should take concrete steps to habituate ourselves to unlearn speciesist prejudice, which involves cultivating an aversion to meat. (shrink)

In this paper I argue that medical providers who wish to prescribe semaglutides for weight loss ought to first consider that their patient may value having an easy relationship with food. I’m calling this food ease. Food ease allows one’s experience of the eating process (e.g., procuring food, cooking, physically eating food, choosing to order take-out or go to a restaurant, etc.) to simply exist as activities constitutive of a life well-lived without becoming objects of anxiety or obsession. Food ease (...) is what someone experiences when they don’t worry about their portion size when eating their favorite meal, or when they eat at a restaurant and don’t count the calories. Ideally, food ease allows the objective facts about food (calories, size, nutrition) to fade into the background of experience while subjectively experiencing the goods (and bads) of self-making through eating. While perfect food ease is perhaps never attainable, the pursuit of food ease is something that can be valued (by me, for one!). -/- After fleshing out the concept of “food ease,” I gloss three ways semaglutides can undermine it and close by arguing that medical providers should think about whether their patients want to experience food ease, and if they do, how the drug would either promote or interfere with these goals. To properly advance patient care, medical providers would thus need to consider their patients’ relationship with their alimentary practices, habits, and preferences before they prescribe semaglutides. (shrink)

In this paper, I argue that respecting a child’s autonomy requires feeding them a plant-based diet, at least until they develop the capacity to formulate their own judgments about the morality of animal consumption. Drawing on the independence view of autonomy, I begin with the premise that a child’s autonomy is violated when their parents enrol them into particular moral, religious, or philosophical doctrines before they are capable of independently examining those doctrines. I then argue that feeding children animal products (...) constitutes such a violation, as it presupposes a contested view about the morality of animal consumption and involves forcing children to participate in a practice that is based on that view. (shrink)

Natur und Kultur überlappen sich paradigmatisch im Bereich der Ernährung. In diesem Beitrag möchte ich mit einem breiten Blickwinkel an das Thema heranführen. Anhand von vier Geschichten werden anschließend charakteristische Phänomene des Kulinarischen herausgearbeitet und daraus ein Deutungsschema abgeleitet, welches Licht auf die Natur-Kultur-Unterscheidung wirft. Das vorgestellte Deutungsschema wird zuletzt knapp an zwei Themen erprobt: an der Ästhetik sowie an der Ethik der Ernährung.

In this paper, I shall argue for Moral Cannibalism, namely the view that cannibalism is morally mandatory, at least for some meat-eaters animals, given some acceptable assumptions about justice and moral duty. Such an incredible claim will be preceded by a short exposition of the rationale for Moral Vegetarianism and for its adversary position Moral Omnivorism (§1), then I will briefly present Moral Cannibalism (§2), and finally I will discuss two arguments for it, a positive one (§3) and a negative (...) one (§4): on the one hand, justice between animal species might imply that it is morally better for some carnivorous species to eat the members of their own species rather than members of other species; on the other hand, the moral wrongness of cannibalism lacks a satisfactory ground. (shrink)

Do you remember January 2020? In a Danish newspaper a cartoon appeared. The Telegraph said, "The cartoon, published in Jyllands-Posten on Monday, depicted a Chinese flag with the yellow stars normally found in the upper left corner exchanged for drawings of the new coronavirus." The Chinese embassy in Denmark said that the cartoon crossed the acceptable boundaries for freedom of speech. Apparently the Chinese people were upset. The cartoon was by Niels Bo Bojesen. The Danish prime minister said that Danes (...) had freedom of expression, including freedom to draw, and apparently there is a long tradition of satirical drawings in Denmark. I saw some reactions online from Chinese people, reminding the world of Danish capitulation to German Nazis, if I remember correctly. You can imagine how the Danes must have talked. "Of course the Chinese can draw but do they have ideas?” “Bobo has ideas.” “A Chinese flag with a virus instead of the yellow stars. That is an idea.” “Bobo is the conceptual artist. The Chinese merely have the technical artist, Yuyu Fang or whatever.” “Is a technical artist actually an artist?” “The Chinese have not yet reached the stage of the concept.” “They have come far quite fast, but not far enough." I went to a Chinese restaurant in Manchester at the time. It was my favourite. It has been shut down now. Anyway, I ordered my usual food but it was strange. There were all these delicate white pieces in the rice. I had to pick them out one by one. I was not happy! Then I remembered all the swans in Hans Christian Andersen and Isak Dinesen (also known as Karen Blixen - I have my own sea story, by the way: The Pirate Cook. “It is not as good as Dinesen.” “Nowhere near as good.”). I did not order this dish but they gave me swan fried rice. You can imagine the Danish reaction upon reading this: "No! No! No! BOBO'S CORONAVIRUS FLAG versus SWAN FRIED RICE. This is horror!!!!" (My new publication is not appearing on my PhilPapers profile yet. If you want to know what is in my stream of consciousness, it is this: Should it not be appearing by now? Should it not? Should it not? Check it again! Check it again! Look: Christian List's new paper is in the new publications section. Mine is not there. Where is it? It's title is, what is it? what is it? Kundera and paradox of analysis, something like that. I can just imagine the reaction. "It is not as good as List's publication." "No, no, definitely not. But at least I understand it." "Oh yes, we must be fair these days and concede that we understand it, whereas we do not understand List." "But we feel, we feel List is better." "Feelings matter." Welcome to Swan Fried Rice level!!! You want some more stuff, 11.43: if List is so good, why does he not explain in plain English how to cure these people of this way of thinking? He's a pessimist, I think. A German philosophical pessimist. "They are what they are. I don't work on stuff like that." That's surely the examination question! And can any of them do modus ponens and how to ensure that they can?). (shrink)

When people choose what to eat, one of the main reasons is the taste of the food. Many people in the world do not have much choice in their diets given their poverty, but in the Western world, the average consumer enjoys an overwhelming variety of affordable foods. The focus of this entry is the role of taste in the food choices of those who do have a choice. With more choices comes more responsibility; deciding what to eat has a (...) moral dimension as well since food choices have an enormous impact on the agent's health, the environment, and the well-being of other humans and animals. The core puzzle posed by taste is its involvement in the most common and ubiquitous cases of what look like weakness of will. Many people find certain foods morally bad because of their presumed or genuinely harmful consequences. For example, one might intend to become a vegetarian if one cares for animals and wants them not to suffer. However, despite of the intention, the person may fail to do so because of her high preferences for the taste of meat. Other examples include the wish to eat healthier or less fattening foods, but somehow the intention gets trumped because one is unable to resist the good taste of those foods. Tastes thus seem to have much more motivating force than often acknowledged. The ethical dimension of the issue is evident when one considers the failure of large masses of people to eat foods that they know to be better for themselves, the environment, the animals, and other people. The entry is structured as follows. Section "What Is Taste?" clarifies the notion of "taste." Section "Tastes as Reasons" discusses the relation of tastes and reasons. Section "The Puzzle of Unethical Food Choices" introduces the puzzle of unethical food choices. Sections "Bad Food Choices as a Consequence of Weakness of the Will" and "Bad Food as the Subjectively Rational Choice" discuss two alternative answers to the puzzle. Section "Are People Egoists?" considers whether ethical egoism might explain the unethical food choices. Section "Ethical Gourmandism" summarizes Korsmeyer's ethical gourmandism which holds that the taste of food depends on its moral properties. Section "Is There a Duty to Train One's Taste?" asks whether there might be a moral duty to train oneself to not prefer the bad foods. (shrink)

This paper addresses the question of whether vegan activists should cater to their audience by framing their message according to the pre-existing values of their interlocutors. Specifically, I focus on deliberative activism, which is based on speech and exchanges with the audience. I propose that message framing can lead to a neglect of animal suffering in favor of focusing on less contentious motives for veganism, such as environmental or health benefits. I claim that neglecting the issue of animal suffering can (...) have several problematic consequences. Concretely, I argue that message framing can: (1) lead to the objectification of animals, treating them as mere means to other ends (such as environmental and health benefits); (2) imply a denial of their personhood; (3) perpetuate their status as property; (4) enable future harm to animals; and (5) create a hierarchy of moral worth among different animal species. For these reasons, I suggest that message framing is less appealing than it initially seems. (shrink)

In 2012, a Venn diagram appeared on the blog The Kitchn detailing the characteristics of what it called the “worst dinner guest ever.” This maligned guest is not only vegan but also gluten and lactose intolerant and allergic to nuts and eggs. While a few commenters agreed with the implication that dietary constraints indicate a failure of appropriate guest behavior, most echoed what Lisa Heldke and Raymond Boisvert (2016) suggest is the dominant American view: hosts are generally obliged to accommodate (...) the dietary restrictions of their guests. For Heldke and Boisvert, this is most obviously true when guests have food allergies and serious harm can be easily avoided by a change in menu. In this essay I argue that epistemic barriers can obscure hosts’ perception of these ostensibly obvious cases, preventing them from fulfilling their obligations. Specifically, I argue that guests with food allergies and other “gut issues” can be subject to testimonial injustice that undermines their credibility, leading hosts to doubt or disbelieve their need for accommodation. Such guests may also be subject to testimonial smothering, discouraging them from disclosing their dietary restrictions in the first place. I argue that these forms of epistemic injustice raise multiple moral concerns and that hosts have a responsibility to practice epistemic humility regarding guests’ reports of gut issues. Overall, this paper aims to enable hosts and guests with gut issues alike to recognize and overcome epistemic obstacles to good hospitality—the importance of which extends far beyond the dinner table. (shrink)

Much has been written about the ethics of eating meat. Far less has been said about the ethics of serving meat. In this paper I argue that we often shouldn’t serve meat, even if it is morally permissible for individuals to purchase and eat meat. Historically, the ethical conversation surrounding meat has been limited to individual diets, meat producers, and government actors. I argue that if we stop the conversation there, then the urgent moral problems associated with industrial animal agriculture (...) will go unsolved. Instead, we must also consider the important but overlooked role that midsized institutions play in addressing major collective problems. I focus mostly on the harms that industrial animal agriculture inflicts on humans, animals, and the environment, but the discussion bears on other global issues like climate change. Institutional choices are an underexplored avenue for driving social change—their power and influence outstrip individual actions, and they can shape behavior in modest ways that promote social goods. Here I highlight the paradigmatic case of catered events and suggest three ways that institutional actors can reduce meat consumption and shape cultural attitudes surrounding meat: large impact decisions, subtly shaping incentives, and consolidating burdens. (shrink)

Researchers of different calibres from phenomenology to posthumanism and beyond have outlined the processuality of the body and the environment (Alaimo 2010; Gendlin 2017), stressing the importance of changing the ontological presuppositions of the body-environment bond (Schoeller and Duanetz 2018: 131), since the existing models facilitate the alienation and intangibility of the environment, thus, leading to reduced societal awareness of the importance of environmental issues (Neimanis, Åsberg, Hedrén 2015: 73–74). In this article, I argue that in questions relating to food, (...) product-oriented ideologies dominate over process-oriented ethicality, in part, due to an embodied and lived ideology that can be best described via the concept of reactive nihilism and substance ontology. The article aims to demonstrate a necessity to rethink and recontextualize situated practices as alternatives to the prevalent ontogenealogies of the Global North. By problematizing the complimentary axis of reactive nihilism in food contexts and the genealogy of contemporary pop food “ethics”, I argue for a shift away from product-oriented ideologies and supplementation of the ontologies-we-live-by with situated alternative models. In the first part of the article, I use a genealogical approach, tracing the predominant meaning cluster encapsulated in Feuerbach’s famous expression “Man is what he eats” (Feuerbach 1846-1866, X: 5) in today’s contexts. To illustrate the leading discourses, I follow a Deleuzian understanding of the concept of “reactive nihilism” and contextualize food choices with the dominant understanding of the body in the Global North. With this discussion, I hope to provide context for the need to reconsider local ontologies as knowledge resources for the future. In the second part of the article, the framework present in the Global North is then complemented by a discussion of some local factors, to suggest ways in which global food philosophy and, particularly, lifestyle choices of food consumption could benefit from acknowledging the knowledge embedded in food consumption trends in Latvia. (shrink)

This book explores indigenous sub-Saharan African agrarian beliefs, values, practices, institutions, as well as contemporary agrarian issues and challenges connected with a changing historical, economic, social, and political landscape in Africa. The book is hinged on the idea that wherever human beings have lived, they have been preoccupied with finding ways to ensure sustainable management of the natural resources at their disposal to take care of their basic needs: food, shelter, and security, and that agriculture is an essential, but generally (...) neglected, determinant of the emergence and orientation of all philosophical traditions. In the quest for food security and subsistence of the group, different beliefs, knowledge systems, moral norms, cultural practices and institutions emerged to guide societies on how to manage the natural environment, to (re)produce and to nurture plants and animals. In this introductory chapter, I sketch out the general features of agrarian philosophy and African agrarian philosophy in particular. (shrink)

In Just Fodder: The Ethics of Feeding Animals, Josh Milburn thinks through the implications of feeding animals by focusing on the relationships between humans and three different groups of animals: (1) animal companions; (2) animal neighbours; and (3) wild animals. In my comments, I concentrate on how the actions and agency interests of these animals problematise some of Milburn’s assumptions and normative prescriptions. My overall aim is to show how giving animal agency more prominence in our thinking about what we (...) owe to them has significant implications. It is my view that current theorising about other animals focuses too heavily on their experiential welfare and not enough on what animals do and the normative significance of what they do. Though I agree with Milburn that all animals have a right against being killed and made to suffer, a full ethical analysis of our relations with other animals must also consider their (equally weighty) interest in self-determination. (shrink)

Philosophical pragmatism provides a theory and practical guidance for engaged philosophy. The movement to apply philosophy to real-world problems gained traction in the 1970s and has become an important area of philosophical inquiry. Applied philosophy draws connections between philosophical principles and real-life problems. This has been a valuable methodology for many purposes, and it especially serves the purposes of philosophers. Unfortunately, it often starts from existing frameworks or principles that are recognized by philosophers but does not start from real-life problems (...) as they are experienced by people. Indeed, sometimes people observe miscommunication and disconnections but are not clear what the source of the problem is. Identifying the nature of a social problem from the perspective of the people who deal with it is a large part of what is required to then analyze the problem philosophically. This requires communicating directly with practitioners, policymakers, and researchers in the field at issue. Paul Thompson’s engaged philosophical approach to agricultural ethics demonstrates the diversity of philosophical activities that are required to accomplish this goal, and it is rooted in pragmatism. Engaged philosophy is more expansive than applied philosophy because it serves many functions and the frameworks produced are emergent rather than prescribed. Engaged philosophy offers an implicit critique of contemporary norms of applied philosophical practice, and it opens up creative opportunities for philosophers to engage in real-life problem solving. This essay traces Paul Thompson’s strategies for engaged philosophy and their relation to pragmatism. (shrink)

Review of: A Philosophy of Recipes: Making, Experiencing, and Valuing. Edited by Andrea Borghini and Patrik Engisch. London: Bloomsbury Academic. 2022.

Those of us who enjoy certain products of the global industrial economy but also believe it is wrong to consume them are often so demoralized by the apparent inefficacy of our individual, private choices that we are unable to resist. Although he was a deontologist, Kant was clearly aware of this ‘consequent-dependent’ side of our moral psychology. One version of his ‘moral proof’ is designed to respond to the threat of such demoralization in pursuit of the Highest Good. That version (...) of the argument says that the capacity that faith and trust in God has to sustain our moral resolve licenses that faith and trust, from a practical point of view. My goal here is to argue that Kant’s proof has a contemporary, secular analogue in modern industrial contexts where the apparent “inefficacy” of an individual consumer’s choices in the face of massive insensitive supply-chains is a threat to her moral resolve. I conclude by suggesting that the Kantian approach may license us in adopting (as an item of defeasible moral faith) an evidential decision-theoretic principle regarding what it is to ‘make a difference.’ This in turn licenses trust -- if not in God then in other right-minded people. (shrink)

First, the thorny problem of locating the Midwest is treated. Second, the ancient Stoics’ understanding of nature is proposed as a fertile field of ecological wisdom. The significance of nature in Stoicism is explained. Stoic philosophers (big-S Stoics) are distinguished from stoical non-philosophers (small-s stoics). Nature’s lessons for living a good Stoic life are drawn. Are such lessons too theoretical to provide practical guidance? This worry is addressed by examining the examples of Cincinnatus and Cato the Elder—ancient Romans lauded for (...) their virtues who worked the land. They exhibited the virtues of civic responsibility, justice, self-sufficiency, parsimony, perseverance, equanimity, modesty, and respect for limits—an agrarian virtue dear to Wendell Berry. Agrarianism views rural society as superior to urban society and the independent farmer as superior to the paid worker. Reflection on the virtues of stoical Roman agrarians suggests that features of Roman Stoic agrarianism resonate with a contemporary instantiation of Stoicism in the Midwest. The main thesis is that Midwest Stoic agrarianism (MSA), guided by an array of earthy virtues, promotes agricultural practices that harmonize with nature and support living in agreement with nature, while rejecting agricultural practices contrary to nature and propelled by vice. MSA endorses, e.g., locally sourced, sustainably grown crops instead of CAFOs. MSA tackles the ecological and sociopolitical pressures confronting Midwest farmers in the Anthropocene and can fortify environmental virtue ethics beyond this region. (shrink)

Eating local food has become a mainstream proxy for virtue and a reliable model of sustainable dieting. It suffers, nonetheless, from genuine criticisms and limitations. In this paper, we suggest theoretical amendments to reorient the local food movement and turn eating local into a robust concept—comprehensive, coherent, and inclusive, affording a firm grip over structural aspects of the food chain. We develop our argument in three parts. The first contends that ‘local’ can be said of lots of entities (e.g. whole (...) or multi-ingredient foods, recipes, menus) and that its meaning varies depending on which entities are under consideration. The second examines three dimensions of being local: the distance from the place of production; the geographical origins; the social links to consumers and producers. The third presents our robust conception of eating local, grounded on a more realistic model that accommodates for heterogeneous and complex actors. (shrink)

Information about sustainability in the sense of resource sufficiency is important for planning, but not in a way that adds anything to the traditional statement of utilitarian philosophy. The “paradox of sustainability” arises because substantive, research-based approaches to sustainability may be too complex to effectively motivate appropriate social responses, especially in a culture where science is presumed to be “value free.” Assessing sustainability in such terms presumes that the farmer is outside the system—not outside in the sense that the farmer's (...) actions have no impact on the system, but in the sense that this way of understanding sustainability presumes that there will always be a farmer present to manage inputs. (shrink)

Numerous arguments concerning harms to animals, the environment, and children plausibly establish a defeasible moral duty to avoid training and encouraging kids to regularly eat animal products – practices we call ‘carnist caregiving’. Yet existing social structures make avoiding carnist caregiving unreasonably difficult or unthinkable for many caregivers. We argue that these caregivers are unjustly induced and/or pressured into carnist caregiving. For social structures are unjust when they make it unreasonably difficult for caregivers to avoid wronging dependent children. So justice (...) requires reforming the social structures, like school meal programs, that systematically prevent caregivers from providing plant-based caregiving for kids. (shrink)

This chapter does four things. First, it considers several questions about the proposed methodology. Second, it answers several objections to the methodology, many of which center on the results of implementing it. Third, it identifies several ways we could improve the methodology going forward, improving the empirical rigor of our approach. Fourth and finally, it takes stock of the project and provides our overall view of its significance. We emphasize that insofar as it’s appropriate to use our welfare range estimates (...) for decision-making, they are placeholders for the main result, which is that the differences between species are smaller than some may have anticipated (or, more cautiously, that there is little empirical basis for postulating larger differences). (shrink)

Religious dietary practices foster a sense of communal identity, certainly, but traditionally they are also regarded as pleasing to God (or the gods, or the ancestors) and spiritually beneficial. In other words, for many religious people, the effects of fasting go well beyond what is immediately observed or empirically measurable, and that is a large part of what motivates participation in the practice. The goal of this chapter is to develop that religious way of thinking into a response to a (...) motivational problem that arises from our awareness of the insensitivity of contemporary food supply chains. If someone can have faith, or at least tenacious hope, that the significance of her food choices goes well beyond what is immediately observed or empirically measurable, then she may be less demoralized by the apparent inefficacy of those choices. The chapter concludes by considering a way in which this broadly religious way of thinking might be available to secular people as well. (shrink)

JEFF SEBO | : In this paper I examine several of the moral and political questions raised by new kinds of meat. I begin by discussing the risks and harms associated with industrial animal agriculture, and I argue that plant-based meat and cultured meat are promising alternatives to conventional meat. I then explore the moral, conceptual, social, political, economic, and technical challenges that stand in the way of widespread adoption of these alternatives. For example, whether or not we achieve widespread (...) adoption will depend on whether or not we can persuade business and political leaders to see plant-based and cultured meat as an opportunity rather than as a threat. Finally, I consider several ways of meeting these challenges, and I argue that we must be very careful if we want to avoid the kinds of problems that other, similar technological innovations such as GMOs have faced. | : Dans cet article, j’examine plusieurs des questions morales et politiques que soulève la production de nouvelles formes de viandes. J’aborde d’abord les risques et les dangers liés à l’agriculture animale industrielle, et je soutiens que la viande à base de plantes et la viande cultivée représentent des alternatives prometteuses à la viande conventionnelle. J’examine ensuite les défis d’ordre moral, conceptuel, social, politique, économique, et technique, qui font obstacle à l’adoption généralisée de ces alternatives. Par exemple, cette dernière dépendra de si on arrive ou non à convaincre les dirigeants politiques et les chefs d’entreprise de voir la viande à base de plantes et la viande cultivée comme une opportunité plutôt que comme une menace. Enfin, je prends en considération plusieurs façons de relever ces défis, et j’appelle à la vigilance quant aux types de problèmes à éviter, auxquels d’autres innovations technologiques ont déjà été confrontés. (shrink)

While seeking novel food sources to feed the increasing population of the globe, several alternatives have been discussed, including algae, fungi or in vitro meat. The increasingly propagated usage of farmed insects for human nutrition raises issues regarding food safety, consumer information and animal protection. In line with law, insects like any other animals must not be reared or manipulated in a way that inflicts unnecessary pain, distress or harm on them. Currently, there is a great need for research in (...) the area of insect welfare, especially regarding species-specific needs, health, farming systems and humane methods of killing. Recent results from neurophysiological, neuroanatomical and behavioral sciences prompt caution when denying consciousness and therefore the likelihood of presence of pain and suffering or something closely related to it to insects. From an animal protection point of view, these issues should be satisfyingly solved before propagating and establishing intensive husbandry systems for insects as a new type of mini-livestock factory farming. (shrink)

Many argue that consumers possess a “right to know” when products contain ingredients derived from genetically modified organisms, on the grounds that it would protect consumer autonomy. In this paper, I critically evaluate that claim. I begin by providing a version of the “consumer autonomy” argument, showing that its success relies on ambiguities in the notion of autonomy. I then distinguish four approaches to autonomy and articulate the circumstances under which they would support active disclosure of a product property. I (...) argue that none of these conceptions would support active disclosure of the presence of ingredients derived from genetically modified organisms. (shrink)

As concerns about the negative health effects of unhealthy eating and overweight/obesity increase, so too do efforts to combat obesity. Both the federal government, as well as state and local governments, have proposed and implemented a variety of healthy eating and obesity prevention policies. Many of these policies are controversial, facing objections that range from the practical to the ethical. In this paper, we consider one such policy — restrictions on food assistance programs that are meant to improve participants’ diet (...) — and one criticism of these policies, that they are inequitable. We take as our primary example the recent, unsuccessful effort by New York State to exclude sweetened beverages from the items eligible for purchase in New York City with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. (shrink)

The current debate about labeling genetically engineered (GE) food focuses on food derived from GE crops, neglecting food derived from GE animals. This is not surprising, as GE animal products have not yet reached the market. Participants in the debate may also be assuming that conclusions about GE crops automatically extend to GE animals. But there are two GE animals - the Enviropig and the AquAdvantage Bred salmon - that are approaching the market, animals raise more ethical issues than plants, (...) and U.S. regulations treat animal products differently from crops. This paper therefore examines the specific question of whether there should be mandatory labeling on all food products derived from GE animals. We examine the likely regulatory pathways, salient differences between GE animals and GE crops, and relevant social science research on consumers’ attitudes. We argue that on any of the likely pathways, the relevant agency has a democratic obligation to require labeling for all GE animal food products. (shrink)

Food is a big business in the EU and nanofood products are beginning to be placed on the market. It is still unclear whether the absence of minimum regulation at a global level promotes or prevents the growth of a market in nanofood. However, the development of an adequate risk management policy in relation to food safety is a key concern for consumers. Importantly, the European Parliament in its 2009 Resolution on “Legal aspects on nanomaterials” called for more in-depth scientific (...) research on the toxicity of compounds in nanomaterials, and for the adoption of an EU definition of nanomaterials for regulatory purposes. Unfortunately, in 2011, nanotechnology led to inconclusive debates in the context of the revision of Novel Food Regulation. General Food Law applies to nanofood in terms of safety requirements, and specific rules also apply to food contact materials containing nanoparticles as well as to to additives, vitamins and minerals. The EU legislator also introduced mandatory labelling in respect of products derived from nanotechnologies. The legal framework is evolving according to the so-called “incremental approach”, a governance model that creates the risk of fragmentation. But the main problem is the inconsistent definition of the terms “nanotechnology” and “nanomaterials” when looking at the enforcement of regulations and the provision of a wide range of specific tools for different nanofoods: for example the use of positive lists of authorised substances applying only to food contact materials, additives and supplements. This contribution aims to review the regulations in force in respect to nanofood and novel foods and to highlight the problems that are still unresolved. (shrink)

È una credenza diffusa che i marchi di origine (DOCG, DOC, DOP, IGT, IGP e PAT, rispettivamente: di origine controllata e garantita; di origine controllata; di origine protetta; indicazione geografica tipica; indicazione geografica protetta; prodotti agroalimentari tradizionali) siano di grande utilità sia per i consumatori che per i produttori: certificando l’origine e il metodo di produzione di un prodotto, essi ne garantiscono una certa qualità di fronte al consumatore. Ma è proprio così? Che cosa giustifica l’introduzione di un marchio di (...) origine? Quanto sostengo qui di seguito è che, sebbene non credo si possa negare che i marchi di origine segnalino anche una certa qualità di un prodotto, forse non sono il modo migliore per farlo. Di fatto, per il consumatore, i marchi non garantiscono niente che vada oltre alla qualità richiesta affinché la certificazione venga rilasciata; ma, al contempo, in quanto forme di protezionismo, favoriscono certi produttori, prevenendo l’utilizzo della denominazione a chi offre un prodotto di qualità analoga o superiore, ma provienente da una zona priva di tradizioni. In altre parole: se vi sono prodotti equiparabili per qualità e gusto ad un dato prodotto di origine, e possibilmente più economicamente vantaggiosi, il consumatore non avrà modo di accorgersene dalla sola nomenclatura. Quindi: i marchi di origine sono (talvolta) un ostacolo all’acquisto e al godimento dei prodotti migliori al miglior prezzo. Talvolta: questo deve essere ben sottolineato, poiché in certi casi (per esempio quello dei PAT) il prodotto certificato dal marchio ha un mercato talmente di nicchia da costituire un tuttuno tra qualità e origine. (Si potrebbe aggiungere che le certificazioni dei marchi non sono sempre ottenute attraverso procedure affidabili. Non insisterò oltre su questo punto, per il quale si rimanda a: Paolo Conti, La leggenda del buon cibo italiano e altri miti alimentari contemporanei, Fazi Editore, 2006; Peter Singer e Jim Mason: The Way We Eat.. (shrink)

In the public debate concerning novel foods, someconsumer groups claim a consumer right to have accessto certain kinds of food in the market. To discusssuch statements, the paper identifies the reasons thatmay justify liberal states to regulate food. Althoughit defends certain paternalistic activities, itfavours an autonomy-centred food policy. Autonomy andconsumer sovereignty require that certain conditionsare fulfilled. It may be argued that one suchcondition is that the consumer should have choices.Against this position, the paper defends the view thatliberty rights to choose (...) are limited to areas whichare of great importance for personal identity and thegood life. Local decisions in the area of foodconsumption do not have such importance, though globalones may have it. But even if this were true,government activity to protect such liberties shouldbe limited to the guarantee of formal conditions forthe good life of persons. It is not a legitimate taskof the government to safeguard specific conceptions ofthe good life. (shrink)

Bee-derived substances are often grouped under broad labels such as bee products or apitherapy, but those labels conceal major differences in chemistry, route, dose, source material, clinical evidence, and risk. This review argues that honey, medical-grade honey, manuka-type honey, propolis, royal jelly, bee venom, venom immunotherapy, pollen, bee bread, beeswax derivatives, drone brood products, stingless bee honey, bee-associated microorganisms, toxic honey syndromes, and beehive- air practices should not be treated as one therapeutic category. The strongest human evidence in the field (...) belongs to venom immunotherapy for patients with clinically relevant Hymenoptera venom allergy, not to general supplementation or folk bee-sting practices. Honey has narrower evidence in selected uses, including pediatric acute cough relief in children over one year of age and certain wound-care contexts, while medical-grade honey must be separated from food-grade honey because clinical dressings require controlled production, contaminant limits, and sterilization. Manuka-type honey has a distinctive chemical basis in methylglyoxal derived from dihydroxyacetone, but antibacterial grading does not by itself establish clinical efficacy for every promoted use. Propolis, royal jelly, beeswax alcohol fractions, pollen, bee bread, and stingless bee honey show varied chemical and biological activity, but human evidence remains limited, heterogeneous, or largely preclinical for many claims. The review maps bee-derived products by product identity, bee species, botanical source, chemistry, route, evidence level, clinical domain, safety risk, and research gap. It also treats infant botulism, anaphylaxis, contact dermatitis, venom reactions, mad honey poisoning, tutin contamination, pyrrolizidine alkaloids, pesticide residues, antibiotic residues, heavy metals, and adulteration as central translational concerns. The future of bee-product research depends on moving from broad apitherapy language to product-specific, evidence-graded, safety-aware clinical translation. (shrink)

Transforming global food systems is crucial for mitigating environmental degradation, reducing the global disease burden and protecting sentient individuals from harm. Despite overwhelming evidence linking animal-sourced foods to ecological damage, resource depletion and public health challenges, gaps remain in promoting sustainable consumption. This urgency is compounded by the scientific recognition of animal sentience, which elevates animal use to a moral issue. This study combines empirical data from a survey of 500 respondents with a literature review to explore motivations and behaviours (...) driving plant-based eating. Key suggested interventions to foster a responsible food system include: (i) raising awareness of animal rights, (ii) disseminating nutritional and environmental knowledge, (iii) reforming agri-food subsidies, (iv) promoting plant-based food research, commercialisation and consumption and (v) fostering social inclusion and positive recognition of vegan identity. By addressing psychological, social and structural barriers to animal-free diets, this study offers actionable strategies for advancing a sustainable future. (shrink)

_The Spirit of the Soil_ challenges environmentalists to think more deeply and creatively about agriculture. Paul B. Thompson identifies four `worldviews' which tackle agricultural ethics according to different philosophical priorities; productionism, stewardship, economics and holism. He examines current issues such as the use of pesticides and biotechnology from these ethical perspectives. This book achieves an open-ended account of sustainability designed to minimise hubris and help us to recapture the spirit of the soil.

_Artificially cultivated meat may have environmental benefits and harm-reductive capabilities, making it crucial to establishing ethical food production practices. However, we argue that salient factors make producing and consuming artificially cultivated meat morally problematic. We detail some of these factors and highlight their roots in different ethical traditions. These factors present serious challenges to the moral permissibility of its production and consumption. We conclude that artificially cultivated meat is unlikely to be the best solution to today’s unethical food production practices.__ (...) _ _Keywords_: cultivated meat, lab-grown meat, vegetarianism, animal rights, ethics. (shrink)

Given the technological constraints of long-duration space travel and planetary settlement, off-Earth humans will likely need to employ food systems very different from their terrestrial counterparts, and newly emerging food technologies are being developed that will shape novel food systems in these off-Earth contexts. Projected off-Earth food systems may therefore potentially “alienate” their users in new ways compared to Earth-based food systems. They will be susceptible to alienation in ways that are similar to such potential on Earth, where there are (...) points of overlap between off-Earth food systems and any of the multitudes of ways in which food systems on Earth are structured. They will also be susceptible to new forms of alienation, as we encounter scenarios that are genuinely structurally novel to humanity. These are especially important to consider since there are comparatively fewer analyses of these food systems where they differ from existing ones. We propose five non-exhaustive sources of value beyond nutrition our individual relationships with a food may possess: gustatory, social, cultural, epistemic, and authorial value. Using these, we offer examples of ways in which an off-Earth food system may exacerbate or alleviate alienation for humans in long-term off-Earth food systems. (shrink)

Climate change is an existential risk reinforced by ordinary actions in afuent societies—often silently present in comfortable and enjoyable habits. This silence is sometimes broken, presenting itself as a nagging reminder of how our habits fuel a catastrophe. As a case in point, global warming has created a state of urgency among wine makers in Spain, as the alcohol level has risen to a point where it jeopardises wine quality and thereby Spanish viticulture. Eforts are currently being made to solve (...) this problem technologically by developing (non-GMO) strains of yeast that produce less alcohol. If successful, this could help save Spanish viticulture. This kind of technological solution is routinely criticised for ofering simplistic “techno-fx” solutions to solve complex societal problems. However, it is not clear what features are criticised by the notion of techno-fx and hence how to avoid this criticism. In our interpretation, the techno-fx notion is not exclusively used as a dismissive term. The notion points to a general virtue of engineering: to create technological solutions that work silently in the background. This asset of technological solutions might sometimes be problematic and sometimes not. Hence, it needs to be analysed case-by-case by paying attention to the moral relevance of the hidden implications of the technology and of the unrefective actions and habits that they facilitate. Such moral analysis will in turn inform strategies for foregrounding this technology to counteract silencing. We discuss what this means in the case of modifying yeast as a viticultural climate resilience strategy. (shrink)

Human and animal interests are often in conflict. In many situations, however, it is unclear how to evaluate and weigh competing human and animal interests, as the satisfaction of the interests of one group often inevitably occurs at the expense of those of the other group. Human-animal conflicts of this kind give rise to ethical questions. If animals count morally for their own sake, then we must ask in which cases the satisfaction or frustration of the interests of humans and (...) animals in conflict situations is justified or unjustified from an ethical perspective. In this article, we argue that limited aggregation accounts represent a promising means for resolving interspecies conflicts. The reason for this is that they can appropriately consider the qualitative relevance of interests, their relative importance to each other, and the number of individuals affected. For our argument, we start from the premise that animals count morally for their own sake, albeit to a lesser extent than humans. That is, we accept the view that animals may be used, for example, as a source of food or in animal research. However, as we will show, many basic interests of animals are sufficiently similar to human interests and can thus be compared to them. Hence, they ought to be aggregated in cases of conflict with human interests. We illustrate our account and its practical implications with the real-world example of a human-animal conflict during the outbreak of a zoonotic disease among farmed animals. We conclude that, in many cases, animal interests ought to be given more importance than they currently receive, which includes distributing the burdens and risks of farming practices more fairly. (shrink)

Climate change increasingly impacts the resilience of ecosystems and agricultural production. On the one hand, changing weather patterns negatively affect crop yields and thus global food security. Indeed, we live in an age where more than one billion people are going hungry, and this number is expected to rise as climate-induced change continues to displace communities and thus separate them from their means of food production (Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre 2015). In this context, if one accepts a humancentric ethic, then (...) the focus would be on addressing impacts to agricultural production, and thus food security (Borlaug 1997; Navin 2012). On the other hand, ecological resilience is also being impacted by climate change, as species go extinct or migrate due to fluctuating temperatures and shifting weather patterns. This reduction of resilience negatively impacts ecosystem services and the ability of the natural world to support life (Palmer and Larson 2014; Urban 2015). From an environmental holist perspective, then, one could argue that the ethical path would be to focus on reducing negative impacts to species and/or local ecosystems rather than increasing crop yields. Thus, there appears to be a tension between the prioritization of crop yields and the mitigation of ecosystem impacts. While this tension is well established in the agricultural literature (Kirschenmann 2010; Noll 2018), climatezas lochange exacerbates the situation, as agricultural lands are stressed and climate-induced migrations increase already high demands for foodstuffs, thus bringing the conflict to the forefront (Macdonald et al. 2015; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2017a). (shrink)

This chapter explores the ethical dimensions of one of the most contentious applications of agricultural biotechnology: the genetic modification of food products. While the development of genetically modified breeds and seeds has many advantages, the public has consistently expressed worries concerning the adoption of genetically modified organisms. The first section of this chapter uses the AquAdvantage salmon debate in the United States to highlight the most common concerns discussed in current labeling debates, from the potential for environmental harm to health (...) impacts. This analysis illustrates how the polarization of the public debate stems from normative conflicts, rather than a lack of empirical research. Two barriers to achieving consensus concerning genetic modification are identified, before the chapter ends with the introduction of the “GMO Value Framework,” a reflexive approach designed to help cultivate fruitful value-focused discussions concerning current and future bioengineering applications. (shrink)

The things that matter most to us are usually those that have some deep meaning and special connection to us. Either because we find them beautiful, because they bring back good memories, or simply because they are things, whose existence we cherish (even if cannot fully explain why). There are also those things that are needed to live and therefore, we value more than any other. Water, food and air are good examples of these things. They are natural resources intrinsically (...) necessary to sustain life and to which all humans want to have access. However, this may not be the only reason why these resources are valuable or worthy of respect. In this paper, I shall defend the view that certain natural resources can be considered valuable not only because they are life-sustaining resources or because they bring direct and countable benefits to people. The ‘integrity’ of these resources, from which many goods and services are derived, can be considered valuable regardless of how necessary it is to sustain human life. Based on this idea, it is expected to question those forms of access and use of natural resources that are beneficial to humans, but that cause serious damage to the environment or that fail to respect the life of other non-human living beings. (shrink)

The goal of ethical veganism is a vegan world or, at least, a significantly vegan world. However, despite the hard work done by vegan activists, global meat consumption has been increasing (Saiidi 2019; Christen 2021). Vegan advocates have focused on ethics but have ignored the importance of tradition and identity. And the advent of veggie meat alternatives has promoted food that emulates animal products thereby perpetuating the meat paradigm. I suggest that, in order to make significant changes toward ending animal (...) exploitation, ethical vegans give more attention to tradition and identity. Furthermore, I propose that raw veganism is the most ethical diet and can be the best way to move away from animal-based food. (shrink)

Humans, animals, and the environment face a universal crisis: antimicrobial resistance. Addressing AR and its multi-disciplinary causes across many sectors including in human and veterinary medicine remains underdeveloped. One barrier to AR efforts is an inconsistent process to incorporate the plenitude of stakeholders about what AR is and how to stifle its development and spread—especially stakeholders from the animal agriculture sector, one of the largest purchasers of antimicrobial drugs. In 2019, The Wellcome Trust released Reframing Resistance: How to communicate about (...) antimicrobial resistance effectively, which proposed the need to establish a consistent and harmonized messaging effort that describes the AR crisis and its global implications for health and wellbeing across all stakeholders. Yet, Reframing Resistance does not specifically engage the animal agriculture community. This study investigates the gap between two principles recommended by Reframing Resistance and animal agriculture stakeholders. For this analysis, the research group conducted 31 semi-structured interviews with a diverse group of United States animal agriculture stakeholders. Participants reported attitudes, beliefs, and practices about a variety of issues, including how they defined AR and what entities the AR crisis impacts most. Exploration of Reframing Resistance’s Principle 2, “explain the fundamentals succinctly” and Principle 3, “emphasis that this is universal issue; it can affect anyone, including you” reveals disagreement in both the fundamentals of AR and consensus of “who” the AR crisis impacts. Principle 2 may do better to acknowledge that animal agriculture stakeholders espouse a complex array of perspectives that cannot be summed up in a single perspective or principle. As a primary tool to combat AR, behavior change must be accomplished first through outreach to stakeholder groups and understanding their perspectives. (shrink)