Once the rockets are up, who should care where they come down? The problem of responsibility ascription for the negative consequences of biofuel innovations

Abstract

Responsible Innovation is often heralded in EU policy circles as a means to achieve ethically acceptable, sustainable innovations. Yet, conceptual questions on the specific notion of ‘responsibility’ and to what extent an innovation can be ‘responsible’ are only partly addressed. In this chapter the question of responsibility for the indirect negative effects of biofuel innovations is explored. While initially hailed as one of the much needed solutions in the global struggle against climate change, the use of biofuels has become increasingly criticised. It is argued that the increased production of biofuels has put smallholder farmers out of business, has given rise to increased food prices, sparking food riots in several countries, while also contributing to further environmental degradation as the demand for new biofuels requires the development of new croplands at the cost of forests and peat lands. In the current market-based system it is customary to disburden researchers and business companies from any responsibility for the more remote consequences of their actions. When harmful consequences are brought about through the mediation of market transactions, they are often considered inevitable and excusable and not an appropriate occasion for invoking anybody’s responsibility. But how broad is the scope of responsibility when it comes to the above mentioned social and ecological problems? By invoking the sacred duty to “innovate”, the business company could perhaps be exculpated. In our age, innovation is often so much celebrated that many negative impacts are duly accepted as the inevitable price of progress. By approaching responsibility from a perspective that takes into account the economic and ecological interconnectedness of the world, we show how the debate on Responsible Innovation in biofuels becomes tied in with global debates on economic justice and bioscarcity. In conclusion we argue that if we—assuming this interconnectedness—take the current requirements of “Responsible” Innovation seriously, it would result in a demanding practice that calls for a substantial departure from business as usual, which prompts the question to what extent it is reasonable to incorporate what are actually demands for global justice in programs for innovation

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

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

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Individual Responsibility for Climate Change.Melany Banks - 2013 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 51 (1):42-66.
Live it-- responsibility.Molly Aloian - 2009 - New York: Crabtree.
Moral responsibility for environmental problems—individual or institutional?Jessica Nihlén Fahlquist - 2009 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 22 (2):109-124.
When responsibility can't do it.A. Gowri - 2004 - Journal of Business Ethics 54 (1):33-50.
The Rationality of Biofuel Certification: A Critical Examination of EU Biofuel Policy.A. J. K. Pols - 2015 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (4):667-681.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-03-18

Downloads
4 (#1,426,245)

6 months
1 (#1,040,386)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references