GMOs and Global Justice: Applying Global Justice Theory to the Case of Genetically Modified Crops and Food [Book Review]

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)
DOI 10.1007/s10806-010-9295-x
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 16,667
External links
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
Thomas Pogge (2005). World Poverty and Human Rights. Ethics and International Affairs 19 (1):1–7.
Thomas Nagel (2005). The Problem of Global Justice. Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (2):113–147.
Peter Singer (1972). Famine, Affluence, and Morality. Philosophy and Public Affairs 1 (3):229-243.

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

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.
A. Wendy Russell & Robert Sparrow (2008). The Case for Regulating Intragenic Gmos. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 21 (2):153-181.
Kok-Chor Tan (2010). Global Justice and Global Relations. Social Theory and Practice 36 (3):499-514.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

101 ( #30,762 of 1,726,249 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

15 ( #48,707 of 1,726,249 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.