Abstract
This paper argues that in modern (agro)biotechnology, (un)naturalness
as an argument contributed to a stalemate in public debate about innovative technologies.
Naturalness in this is often placed opposite to human disruption. It also
often serves as a label that shapes moral acceptance or rejection of agricultural
innovative technologies. The cause of this lies in the use of nature as a closed, static
reference to naturalness, while in fact ‘‘nature’’ is an open and dynamic concept
with many different meanings. We propose an approach for a dynamic framework
that permits an integrative use of naturalness in debate, by connecting three sorts of
meaning that return regularly in the arguments brought forward in debate; cultural,
technological, and ecological. We present these as aspects of nature that are always
present in the argument of naturalness. The approach proposes a dynamic relation
between these aspects, formed by gradients of naturalness, which in turn are related
to ethical concerns. In this way we come to an overview that makes it possible to
give individual arguments a relative place and that does justice to the temporality of
the concept of nature and the underlying ethical concerns stakeholders have in
respect to innovation in agriculture.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 797-812 |
Journal | Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics |
Volume | 25 |
Issue number | 6 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2012 |
Keywords
- consequences
- propagation
- environment
- organisms
- genome
- gene