U3P2: ethical paradigms

Question 1

ecocentrism

Answer 1

earth-centred values vs than human-centred

proponents of ecocentrism advocate an environmental ethic which values nature in and for itself, rather than only in relation to its significance for the survival and well-being of humans or other select species.(ie don’t plant trees bc we don’t even know what forsts were like before human interaction)

adherence to the land ethic results in a change of human self-perception; humans cease to see themselves as conquerors or as members of a superior species on the planet but rather see themselves as plain members and participating citizens of the land community.

Aldo Leopold = book “land ethic” which is the basis of ethocent4ism

Question 2

anthropocentrists/anthropocentrism

Answer 2

• philosophical perspective asserting that ethical principles apply to humans only, and that human needs and interests are of highest, and for some, even exclusive value and importance.

Question 3

Modern or weak anthropocentrism

Answer 3

argues that even if humans have to be valued higher than other things in nature (by humans) we can extend moral value to all living beings and to the natural world as a whole, of which humans are a part of

it is in the best interest of human beings to understand that the well-being of the human species is inextricably linked to the health of the biosphere (enlightened self-interest)

Question 4

ethical paradigms of animal welfare (specifically western countries)

Answer 4

animals should be disease-, hunger- and thirst-free (biological functions/health) concepts of natural behaviour and affective state

Question 5

Ethical paradigms concerning transgenic crops and GE in Europe (what ethical. paradigm do they favour?)

Answer 5

PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE:
transgenic crops can be allowed if the demonstration that these crops are not harmful is complete and comprehensive and include possible long-term effects
- policy includes regulation risks to human and environmental health, ethical + socioeconomic factors

• need more long-term studies

Some people are starting to question the relevance of the precautionary principle applied in Europe(due to 20yrs worth of data showing no health effects) but the lobby by citizens and agricultural interests is so strong that it is likely that it will remain in place for a while.

Question 6

the main characteristic of the precautionary principle

Answer 6

puts social values first in situations where there is scientific uncertainty

Question 7

Ethical paradigms concerning transgenic crops and GE in Canada and the US (what ethical paradigm do they favour?)

Answer 7

SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE:
states that if a new food is essentially equivalent to another existing food then the safety protocols of the existing food automatically apply for the new one.
- a transgenic crop which contains a few genes that are different from the genome of a similar conventional crop is generally found to be substantially equivalent to its conventional counterpart

*manufacturers provide a report to the government after tests on toxins, nutrients, allergens, etc (if similar to conventional then its approved)

Question 8

Norway’s view/ assessment of GE crops

Answer 8

The Norwegian Gene Technology Act requires that a genetically-engineered organism should demonstrate the societal utility and fulfill criteria of sustainable development to be approved for sale in the country

• environmental + social sustainability > extent of testing duration
• utility>risk
• harder to measure
  framework pertains to crops exported to norway but also the ones grown there(vs the EU which on cover health and environment in the EU)