Re: Sustainable Agriculture and Ethics
Patrick Madden (EUH6JPM@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU)
Thu, 31 Mar 94 09:24 PST
Jonathan, while I agree with your (obvious) point that sustainability can be
pursued in unethical ways, your solution ("The discussion of sustainability
therefore needs to be subdivided into its constituent part, with the ethical
and other concerns confined to the appropriate context") is the wrong way to
go. It promotes the same reductionist approach that has produced a plethora of
"solutions" that have subsequently become new or magnified "problems." What is
needed, in my personal view, is an integrative approach that recognizes the
ethical and ecological implications of everything we do in science, in business
and as consumers. More holism rather than more reductionism is needed.
Patrick Madden
>
>
>
> One of the problems which has plagued many definitions
> of sustainable agriculture is the tendency to conflate
> moral and ethical judgments and ideas with questions
> of practice. Sustainability of agriculture depends on the
> physical/biological constraints on actual production, and
> the social/cultural constraints which define what kinds
> of production will be acceptable. What we judge to be
> ethically desirable in our society is a distinct set of
> concerns which do not necessarily affect sustainability.
> For example it is quite possible to have a sustainable
> agricultural system, which includes long-distance trade,
> reduces species diversity, degrades habitat, is in many
> aspects a monoculture, and is embedded in a hierarchical,
> centralized, bureaucrat, xenophobic, system which
> oppresses minorities and features huge disparities of
> wealth. Imperial China being a notable example.
>
> It is therefore quite dangerous to conflate issues of
> sustainability with those of social morality or societal
> ethics. I can see how the justification for an extremely
> coercive system could be based on the necessity of
> sustainability, with examples to demonstrate that it
> works.
>
> It is also false and unfair to sustainability as a vehicle
> to further a moral agenda. This puts opponents in the
> position of advocating starvation, by creating a false
> connection between the technical/social issue of sustainable
> possibility and a set of moral tenants.
>
> This does not mean that we can not examine outlooks, ideas
> and ethical constructs for their impact on the environment
> and sustainability. For example it is easy to see how the
> notion that humans have dominion over the earth, which is
> an adversary to be conquered, could lead to the complete
> and devastating deforestation of an area. However, to then
> attempt to *derive* an ethical system from the natural system
> and its preservation, is fallacious. It would be quite possible
> to determine and maintain a low/sustainable forest yield,
> with a high level of diversity, using slave labor for the
> survey and public executions for those who over harvest.
>
> The discussion of sustainability therefore needs to be
> subdivided into its constituent parts, with the ethical and
> other concerns confined to the appropriate context.
>
> Jonathan Haskett
> jhaskett@asrr.arsusda.gov
>
>