Abstract
In this paper we argue that there is a duty to inform consumers about the environmental impact of foods, and discuss what this duty entails and to whom it falls. We analyze previous proposals that justify ethical traceability with arguments from sustainability and the respect for the autonomy of consumers, showing that they cannot ground a duty to inform. We argue instead that the duty rests on the right of consumers not to be harmed, insofar as consumers have an interest in the morality of their own agency that is frustrated if they are not informed about the environmental impact of the production and transport of what they consume. Our argument detaches the regulation of labeling from substantive theories of environmental ethics or perfectionist conceptions of citizens’ responsibility, thus defending a case for labeling that is compelling also for those who take the role of the state to be limited to the prevention of harm.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
E.g., Carlsson-Kanyama et al. (2003) have provided a proof-of-principle for the calculation of the greenhouse gases emissions of the life-cycle for 150 food items. On various specific issues, there are methods of estimating environmental impact with the aim of labeling, see for instance Lenzen et al. (2012) on biodiveristy loss and global trade. .
We use the terms “duty” and “right” in the sense of Dworkin (1978): rights generate duties and trump other conflicting moral considerations. In our case, if labeling is a duty, then no competing claim which is not itself based on a different right can weaken its demands.
We are freely inspired by Nozick’s experience machine (1974).
References
Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2001). Principles of biomedical ethics (5th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Beekman, V. (2008). Consumer rights to informed choice on the food market. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 11(1), 61–72.
Carlsson-Kanyama, A., Ekstroem, M. P., & Shanhan, H. (2003). Food and life cycle energy inputs: Consequences of diet and ways to increase efficiency. Ecological Economics, 43, 293–307.
Coff, C., Barling, D., Korthals, M., & Nielsen, T. (2007). Ethical traceability and communicating food. Dordrecht: Springer.
De Tavernier, J. (2012). Food citizenship: Is there a duty for responsible consumption? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, doi:10.1007/s10806-01109366-7.
Dworkin, R. (1978). Taking rights seriously. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Hansen, K. (2004). Does autonomy count in favor of labeling genetically modified food? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 17(1), 67–76.
Harris, J. (2005). Scientific research is a moral duty. Journal of Medical Ethics, 31(4), 242–248.
Lang, T., & Heasman, M. (2007). Food wars. London: Earthscan.
Lenzen, M., et al. (2012). International trade drives biodiversity threats in developing nations. Nature, 486, 109–112.
Micheletti, M. (2003). Political virtue and shopping. Individuals, Consumerism, and Collective Action. New York: Palgrave.
Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.
Rawls, J. (1993). Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Rubel, A., & Streiffer, R. (2004). Respecting the autonomy of european and american consumers: Defending positive labels on GM foods. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 18(1), 75–84.
United Nations Development Programme. (2011). Human development report. New York: UNDP.
World Commision on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Del Savio, L., Schmietow, B. Environmental Footprint of Foods: The Duty to Inform. J Agric Environ Ethics 26, 787–796 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-012-9414-y
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-012-9414-y