Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Framework for the Ethical Analysis of Novel Foods: The Ethical Matrix

  • Published:
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper addresses the issue of how indemocratic societies a procedure might be formulatedto facilitate ethical judgements on modernbiotechnologies used in food production. A frameworkfor rational ethical analysis, the Ethical Matrix, isproposed. The Matrix adapts the principles describedby Beauchamp and Childress for application to medicalissues, to interest groups (e.g., producers,consumers, and the biotic environment) affected bythese technologies. The use of the Matrix isillustrated by applying it to an example of a ``novelfood,'' viz., a form of genetically modified maize.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Beauchamp, T. L. and J. F. Childress, Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 4th edition (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  • British Council, “Governance and Law: Ethics in Public Life and Corporate Governance” (London: British Council, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • European Community, “Regulation 258/97: Novel Foods and Novel Food Ingredients,” Official Journal of the European Community L25 (14.2.97), 1-7.

  • Gates, P. J., “Bioethical Issues in Crop Production,” in T. B. Mepham, G. A. Tucker, and J. Wiseman (eds.), Issues in Agricultural Bioethics (Nottingham: Nottingham University Press, 1995), pp. 151-162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillon, R., “The Four Principles Revisited - a Reappraisal,” in R. Gillon (ed.), Principles of Healthcare Ethics (London: Wiley, 1994), pp. 319-333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland A., “Artificial Lives: Philosophical Dimensions of Farm Animal Biotechnology,” in T. B. Mepham, G. A. Tucker, and J. Wiseman (eds.), Issues in Agricultural Bioethics (Nottingham: Nottingham University Press, 1995), pp. 293-305.

    Google Scholar 

  • IGD, Genetically Modified Foods: Maize (Information Leaflet) (Watford: Institute of Grocery Distribution, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I., Lectures on Ethics (translated from German by Louis Infield) (London: Methuen, 1930).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mepham, T. B., “Ethical Impacts of Biotechnology in Dairying,” in C. J. C. Phillips (ed.), Progress in Dairy Science (Wallingford: CAB International, 1996a), pp. 375-395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mepham, T. B., “Ethical Analysis of Food Biotechnologies: An Evaluative Framework,” in T. B. Mepham (ed.), Food Ethics (London: Routledge, 1996b), pp. 101-119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mepham, T. B., C. J. Moore, and R. E. Crilly, “An Ethical Analysis of the Use of Xenografts in Human Transplant Surgery,” Bulletin ofMedical Ethics 116 (1996), 13-18.

    Google Scholar 

  • MAFF, Advisory Committee on Pesticides Annual Report (London: Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  • MAFF/DoH, Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes (ACNFP) Annual Report 1997 (London: Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and Department of Health, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J., “Outline of a Decision Procedure for Ethics,” The Philosophical Review 60 (1951), 177-197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J., A Theory of Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  • Royal Society, Genetically Modified Plants for Food Use (London: The Royal Society, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Tuuk, E., “Intrinsic Value and the Struggle Against Anthropocentrism,” in M. Dol, M. F. Van Vlissingen, S. Kasanmoentalib, T. Visser, and H. Zwart (eds.), Recognizing the Intrinsic Value in Animals (Van Gorcum, Assen, 1999), pp. 29-37.

  • Verweij, M., “Moral Principles: Authoritative Norms or Flexible Guidelines?” in W. van der Burg and T. van Willigenberg (eds.), Reflective Equilibrium (Netherlands: Kluwer, 1998), pp. 29-40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watanabe, T. and T. Sano, “Neurological Effects of Glufosinate Poisoning with a Brief Review,” Human and Experimental Toxicology 17 (1998), 35-39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winkler, E. R., “From Kantianism to Contextualism: The Rise and Fall of the Paradigm Theory in Bioethics,” in E. R. Winkler and J. R. Coombs (eds.), Applied Ethics (Oxford: Blackwell, 1993), 343-365.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Applied Bioethics, University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington Campus, Loughborough, Leics, LE12 5RD, UK E-mail:

    Ben Mepham

Authors
  1. Ben Mepham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mepham, B. A Framework for the Ethical Analysis of Novel Foods: The Ethical Matrix. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 12, 165–176 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009542714497

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009542714497

Search

Navigation