Agriculture and Human Values 33 (2):403-414 (2016)

Frans Stafleu
Utrecht University
Franck Meijboom
Utrecht University
Food production, water management, land use, and animal and public health are all topics of extensive public debate. These themes are linked to the core activities of the agricultural sector, and more specifically to the work of farmers. Nonetheless, the ethical discussions are mostly initiated by interest groups in society rather than by farmers. At least in Europe, consumer organizations and animal welfare and environmental organizations are more present in the public debate than farmers. This is not how it should be. First, because consumers often cannot but rely on agriculture. Second, because recent research shows that farmers have moral beliefs and convictions that appear to be broader than economic considerations and that are—to a certain extent—specific to their profession. This raises the question how to make input from farmers operational in the public debates on the future of farming. We discuss one option: entrusting farmers with professional autonomy concerning moral matters related to farming. We sketch the historical background of the current situation in which farmers are relatively silent on moral matters and we present some clear indications that farmers have values and moral beliefs that are relevant for the public debate. Next the concepts of professionalism and professional autonomy are discussed and applied to the practice of farming. Finally, we discuss the relevance and limits of professional moral autonomy for the agricultural profession. We close with an overview of what this moral autonomy implies for and requires from farmers in practice. We conclude that if some preconditions are met by farmers, then this type of moral autonomy can be relevant for farmers and for society, and contributes to the quality of the public debate on the future of farming.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10460-015-9641-8
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,714
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

Principles of Biomedical Ethics.Tom L. Beauchamp - 1979 - Oxford University Press.
Animal Liberation.Peter Singer (ed.) - 1977 - Avon Books.
Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action.David M. Rasmussen - 1993 - Philosophical Quarterly 43 (173):571.

View all 16 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Ethics Consultation and Autonomy.Jukka Varelius - 2008 - Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (1):65-76.
“Not Man for the Sabbath”: Professional Dignity and Ethical Codes.Jan Motal - 2014 - Ethics and Bioethics (in Central Europe) 4 (3-4):117-122.
Relational Professional Autonomy.Chris Macdonald - 2002 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 11 (3):282-289.
We Should Allow Dissection of Animals.A. David Kline - 1995 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 8 (2):190-197.


Added to PP index

Total views
25 ( #443,933 of 2,462,752 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #179,092 of 2,462,752 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes