GMOs and Global Justice: Applying Global Justice Theory to the Case of Genetically Modified Crops and Food [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (2):223-237 (2012)
Proponents of using genetically modified (GM) crops and food in the developing world often claim that it is unjust not to use GMOs (genetically modified organisms) to alleviate hunger and malnutrition in developing countries. In reply, the critics of GMOs claim that while GMOs may be useful as a technological means to increase yields and crop quality, stable and efficient institutions are required in order to provide the benefits from GMO technology. In this debate, the GMO proponents tend to rely on a simple utilitarian type of calculus that highlights the benefits of GMOs to the poor, but that overlooks the complex institutional requirements necessary for GMO production. The critics, recognizing the importance of institutional conditions, focus primarily on the negative impacts of institutional deficiencies, thereby overlooking the basically Rawlsian claim that institutions per se may generate claims to justice. This article investigates how GMOs might generate claims to global justice and what type of justice is involved. The paper argues that the debate on GMOs and global justice can be categorized into three views, i.e., the cosmopolitan, the pluralist, and the sceptic. The cosmopolitan holds that GMOs can and should be used for alleviating global hunger, whereas the sceptic rejects this course of action. I will argue here for a moderately cosmopolitan approach, relying on the pluralist view of institutions and the need to exploit the benefits of GMOs. This argument rests on the premise that global cooperation on GMO production provides the relevant basis for assessing the use of GMOs by the standard of global distributive justice
|Keywords||Global justice Basic structure Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) International law WTO Borlaug hypothesis|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
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
Arash Abizadeh (2007). Cooperation, Pervasive Impact, and Coercion: On the Scope (Not Site) of Distributive Justice. Philosophy and Public Affairs 35 (4):318–358.
Frans W. A. Brom (2004). WTO, Public Reason and Food Public Reasoning in the 'Trade Conflict' on GM-Food. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7 (4):417 - 431.
Ruth Chadwick & Sarah Wilson (2004). Genomic Databases as Global Public Goods? Res Publica 10 (2):123-134.
Joshua Cohen & Charles Sabel (2006). Extra Rempublicam Nulla Justitia? Philosophy and Public Affairs 34 (2):147–175.
Sheila Jasanoff (2007). Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton Univ Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Onyeka K. Osuji & Okechukwu Timothy Umahi (2012). Pharmaceutical Companies and Access to Medicines – Social Integration and Ethical CSR Resolution of a Global Public Choice Problem. Journal of Global Ethics 8 (2-3):139-167.
Similar books and articles
Dane Scott (2005). The Magic Bullet Criticism of Agricultural Biotechnology. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (3):189-197.
E. Ann Clark & Hugh Lehman (2001). Assessment of GM Crops in Commercial Agriculture. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (1):3-28.
Mikael Karlsson (2003). Ethics of Sustainable Development – a Study of Swedish Regulations for Genetically Modified Organisms. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 16 (1):51-62.
András Miklós (2011). The Basic Structure and the Principles of Justice. Utilitas 23 (2):161-182.
A. Wendy Russell & Robert Sparrow (2008). The Case for Regulating Intragenic Gmos. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 21 (2):153-181.
Anne Ingeborg Myhr (2010). A Precautionary Approach to Genetically Modified Organisms: Challenges and Implications for Policy and Science. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23 (6):501-525.
J. Robert Loftis (2007). The Other Value in the Debate Over Genetically Modified Organisms. Journal of Philosophical Research 32 (Supplement):151-162.
John Pearson (2011). National Responsibility, Global Justice and Exploitation: A Preliminary Analysis. Journal of Global Ethics 7 (3):321-335.
Cindy Holder (2012). Justice, Cosmopolitanism and Policy Prescription: Gillian Brock’s "Global Justice&Quot;. Diametros 31 (31):138-145.
Aaron Maltais (2008). Global Warming and the Cosmopolitan Political Conception of Justice. Environmental Politics 17 (4):592-609.
Dayuan Xue & Clem Tisdell (2002). Global Trade in GM Food and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety: Consequences for China. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 15 (4):337-356.
Allison B. Wolf (2005). Can Global Justice Provide a Path Toward Achieving Justice Across the Americas? Journal of Global Ethics 1 (2):153 – 176.
Kok-Chor Tan (2010). Global Justice and Global Relations. Social Theory and Practice 36 (3):499-514.
Added to index2010-11-18
Total downloads40 ( #41,710 of 1,099,018 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #33,832 of 1,099,018 )
How can I increase my downloads?