Skip to main content

Agricultural Science and Ethics

  • Living reference work entry
  • Latest version View entry history
  • First Online:
Encyclopedia of Food and Agricultural Ethics
  • 122 Accesses

Synonyms

Animal welfare; Ethics of nature; Sustainability; Values in science

Introduction

Humans live in constant interaction with nature. That is part and parcel of being a biological creature on this planet. On one hand, humans exploit the available resources to survive, and at the same time, humans are deeply dependent on the continued capacity of nature to sustain their lives and the lives of their children and future generations. But something has changed over the past 50 years: Never before in human history have so many animal and plant species been made extinct so fast – and 10–30% of mammal, bird, and amphibian species are currently threatened with extinction; freshwater ecosystems are particularly at risk. Never before has humankind been so destructive and exploitative in relation to ecosystems and vital resources as now. Just as an example, in the last decades of the twentieth century, about 20% of the world’s coral reefs and 35% of the mangrove areas were lost (Millennium...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abram, D. (1996). The spell of the sensuous. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anneberg, I. (2013). Actions of and interactions between authorities and livestock farmers – In relation to animal welfare. PhD thesis, Science and Technology, Aarhus University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anonymous (2012). ‘Green brain’ project to create and autonomous flying robot with a honey bee brain. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121001111405.htm. Downloaded 1 May 2014.

  • Beus, C. E., & Dunlap, R. E. (2010). Conventional versus alternative agriculture: The paradigmatic roots of the debate. Rural Sociology, 55(4), 590–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullather, N. (2010). The hungry world – America’s cold war battle against poverty in Asia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fang, F. C. (2011). Reductionistic and holistic science. Infection and Immunity, 79(4), 1401–1404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, D. (2008). Understanding animal welfare. The science in its cultural context. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamborg, C., & Sandøe, P. (2005). Sustainability in farm animal breeding: A review. Livestock Production Science, 92(3), 221–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, J. (2006). Wild. An elemental journey. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, R. (1964). Animal machines. The new factory farming industry. London: Vincent Stuart Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkes, C., Chopra, M., & Friel, S. (2009). Globalization, trade, and the nutrition transition. In R. Labonté, T. Schrecker, C. Packer, & V. Runnels (Eds.), Globalization and health: Pathways, evidence and policy (pp. 235–262). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynes, R. P. (2008). Animal welfare. Competing conceptions and their ethical implications. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, G. E., & Garforth, C. (1997). The history, development and future of agricultural extension. In B. E. Swanson, R. P. Bentz, & A. J. Sofranko (Eds.), Improving agricultural extension. A reference manual. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. Chapter 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krebs, A. (1999). Ethics of nature. A map. New York: Walter de Gruyter.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lesser, L. I., Ebbeling, C. B., Goozner, M., & Ludwig, D. S. (2007). Relationship between funding source and conclusion among nutrition-related scientific articles. PLoS Medicine, 4(1), 41–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mepham, B. (Ed.). (1996). Food ethics. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robin, M. M. (2010). The world according to Monsanto. New York: New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steadman, I. (2012). Engineers plan to upload bee brains to flying robots. Wired, 03(10), 12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinfeld, H., Gerber, P., Wasenaar, T., Castel, V., Rosales, M., & de Haan, C. (2006). Livestock’s long shadow: Environmental issues and options. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suryanarayanan, S., & Kleinman, D. L. (2013). Be(e)coming experts: The controversy over insecticides in the honey bee colony collapse disorder. Social Studies of Science, 43(2), 215–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. B., & Stout, B. A. (Eds.). (1991). Beyond the large farm: Ethics and research goals for agriculture. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilman, D., Cassman, K. G., Matson, P. A., Naylor, R., & Polask, S. (2002). Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature, 418, 671–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tybirk, K., Alrøe, H. F., & Frederiksen, P. (2004). Nature quality in organic farming: A conceptual analysis of considerations and criteria in a European context. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 17, 249–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (1987). Our common future. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, general assembly resolution 42/187. United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valentin, A., & Spangenberg, J. H. (2000). A guide to community sustainability indicators. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 20, 381–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster, S. (2003). Thinking about biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wiersum, K. F. (1995). 200 years of sustainability in forestry: Lessons from history. Environmental Management, 19(3), 321–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeates, J., Röcklinsberg, H., & Gjerris, M. (2011). Science in regulation: A critique of policymaking based solely on animal welfare science. Animal Welfare, 20, 423–432.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mickey Gjerris .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this entry

Cite this entry

Gjerris, M., Vaarst, M. (2016). Agricultural Science and Ethics. In: Thompson, P., Kaplan, D. (eds) Encyclopedia of Food and Agricultural Ethics. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6167-4_257-2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6167-4_257-2

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-007-6167-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-007-6167-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Chapter history

  1. Latest

    Agricultural Science and Ethics
    Published:
    04 January 2017

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6167-4_257-2

  2. Original

    Agricultural Science and Ethics
    Published:
    28 April 2014

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6167-4_257-1