Online research in philosophy

There are many different meanings of sustainability and precaution and no evident connection between the new normative concepts and the traditional moral theories. We seek an ethical basis for sustainability and precaution—a common framework that can serve as a means of resolving the conceptual ambiguities of the new normative concepts and the conflicts between new and traditional moralconcepts and theories. We employ a systemic approach to analyze the past and possible future extension of ethics and establish an inclusive framework of (...) ethical extension. This framework forms the basis for what we call a systemic ethic. (shrink)

There are many different meanings of sustainability and precaution and no evident connection between the new normative concepts and the traditional moral theories. We seek an ethical basis for sustainability and precaution—a common framework that can serve as a means of resolving the conceptual ambiguities of the new normative concepts and the conflicts between new and traditional moralconcepts and theories. We employ a systemic approach to analyze the past and possible future extension of ethics and establish an inclusive framework of (...) ethical extension. This framework forms the basis for what we call a systemic ethic. (shrink)

The recent development and growth oforganic livestock farming and the relateddevelopment of national and internationalregulations has fueled discussions amongscientists and philosophers concerning theproper conceptualization of animal welfare.These discussions on livestock welfare inorganic farming draw on the conventionaldiscussions and disputes on animal welfare thatinvolve issues such as different definitions ofwelfare (clinical health, absence of suffering,sum of positive and negative experiences,etc.), the possibility for objective measuresof animal welfare, and the acceptable level ofwelfare. It seems clear that livestock welfareis a value-laden concept and (...) that animalwelfare science cannot be made independent ofquestions of values and ethics. The questioninvestigated here is whether those values thatunderpin organic farming, in particular, alsoaffect the interpretation of livestock welfare,and, if so, how. While some of the issuesraised in connection with organic farming arerelatively uncontroversial, others are not. Theintroduction of organic farming values seems tointroduce new criteria for what counts as goodanimal welfare, as well as a different ethicalbasis for making moral decisions on welfare.Organic farming embodies distinctive systemicor communitarian ethical ideas and the organicvalues are connected to a systemic conceptionof nature, of agriculture, of the farm, and ofthe animal. The new criteria of welfare arerelated to concepts such as naturalness,harmony, integrity, and care. While the organicvalues overlap with those involved in theconventional discussion of animal welfare, someof them suggest a need to set new prioritiesand to re-conceptualize animal welfare – forexample, with respect to ``naturalness,'''' inrelation to the possibilities for expression ofnatural behavior and in relation to animalintegrity as a concept for organismic harmony.The organic perspective also seems to suggest awider range of solutions to welfare problemsthan changes in farm routines or operations onthe animals. The systemic solutions include thechoice and reproduction of suitable breeds,changes in the farm structure, and changes inthe larger production and consumption system – including consumer perceptions andpreferences. But the organic values may alsocall for sacrifices of individual welfare in aconventional sense in order to advance welfarefrom the perspective of organic farming.Whether this is good or bad cannot be decidedwithout entering into an inquiry and discussionof the values and ethics involved. (shrink)

During the past few years,organic dairy farming has grown dramatically inDenmark. Consequently, an increasing number ofpeople are encountering this method ofproduction for the first time. Amongst these,many veterinarians have suddenly had to dealwith organic herds in their home district, and,meeting examples of poor animal welfare, theyhave recently started to express some concerns.

Separate focus on crop fertilization or feeding practices inadequately describes nitrogen (N) loss from mixed dairy farms because of (1) interaction between animal and crop production and between the production system and the manager, and (2) uncertainties of herd N production and crop N utilization. Therefore a systems approach was used to study N turnover and N efficiency on 16 conventional and 14 organic private Danish farms with mixed animal (dairy) and crop production. There were significant differences in N surplus (...) at the farm level (242 kg. N/ha. vs. 124 kg. N/ha. on conventional and organic dairy farms respectively) with a correlation between stocking rate and N surplus. N efficiency was calculated as the output of N in animal products divided by the net N import in fodder, manure and fertilizer. N turnover in herd and individual crops calculated on selected farms showed differences in organic and conventional crop N utilization. This is explained via a discussion of the rationality behind the current way of planning the optimum fertilizer application in conventional agriculture. The concept of marginal N efficiency is insufficient for correcting problems of N loss from dairy farms. Substantial reductions in N loss from conventional mixed dairy farms is probably unlikely without lower production intensity. The concept of mean farm unit N efficiency might be a way to describe the relation between production and N loss to facilitate regulation. This concept is linked to differing goals of agricultural development—i.e. intensification and separation vs. extensification and integration. It is discussed how studies in private farms—using organic farms as selected critical cases—can demonstrate possibilities for balancing production and environmental concern. (shrink)