Moral “Lock-In” in Responsible Innovation: The Ethical and Social Aspects of Killing Day-Old Chicks and Its Alternatives

Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (5):939-960 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to provide a conceptual framework that will help in understanding and evaluating, along social and ethical lines, the issue of killing day-old male chicks and two alternative directions of responsible innovations to solve this issue. The following research questions are addressed: Why is the killing of day-old chicks morally problematic? Are the proposed alternatives morally sound? To what extent do the alternatives lead to responsible innovation? The conceptual framework demonstrates clearly that there is a moral “lock-in”, and why the killing of day-old chicks is indeed an issue. Furthermore, it is shown that both alternative directions address some important objections with regard to the killing of day-old chicks, but that they also raise new dilemmas. It also becomes clear that the framework enables and secures anticipation, reflection, deliberation with and responsiveness to stakeholders, the four dimensions of responsible innovation, in a structured way.

Similar books and articles

Self-Defence and the Principle of Non-Combatant Immunity.Helen Frowe - 2011 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 8 (4):530-546.
Killing, wrongness, and equality.Carlos Soto - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 164 (2):543-559.
Killing and Equality.Jeff McMahan - 1995 - Utilitas 7 (1):1-29.
Utilitarian killing, replacement, and rights.Evelyn Pluhar - 1990 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 3 (2):147-171.
Suicide.Michael Cholbi - 2013 - International Encyclopedia of Ethics.
Life-prolonging killings and their relevance to ethics.Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen - 1999 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2 (2):135-147.
Killing fetuses and killing newborns.Ezio Di Nucci - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (5):19-20.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-05-14

Downloads
219 (#69,046)

6 months
62 (#30,840)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Vincent Blok
Wageningen University and Research

References found in this work

Principles of biomedical ethics.Tom L. Beauchamp - 1989 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by James F. Childress.
Practical Ethics.Peter Singer - 1979 - New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by Susan J. Armstrong & Richard George Botzler.
The Case for Animal Rights.Tom Regan - 1985 - Univ of California Press.
The case for animal rights.Tom Regan - 2009 - In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Noûs. Oxford University Press. pp. 425-434.

View all 19 references / Add more references