Ethical Discourse on the Use of Genetically Modified Crops: A Review of Academic Publications in the Fields of Ecology and Environmental Ethics

  • Daniel Gregorowius
  • Petra Lindemann-Matthies
  • Markus Huppenbauer
Articles

Abstract

The use of genetically modified plants in agriculture (GM crops) is controversially discussed in academic publications. Important issues are whether the release of GM crops is beneficial or harmful for the environment and therefore acceptable, and whether the modification of plants is ethically permissible per se. This study provides a comprehensive overview of the moral reasoning on the use of GM crops expressed in academic publications from 1975 to 2008. Environmental ethical aspects in the publications were investigated. Overall, 113 articles from 15 ecology, environmental ethics, and multidisciplinary science journals were systematically reviewed. Three types of moral concerns were used to structure the normative statements, moral notions, and moral issues found in the articles: concerns addressing consequences of the use of GM crops, concerns addressing the act (the technique itself), and concerns addressing the virtues of an actor. Articles addressing consequences (84%) dealt with general ecological and risk concerns or discussed specific ecological issues about the use of GM crops. Articles addressing the act (57%) dealt with the value of naturalness, the value of biotic entities, and conceptual reductionism, whereas articles addressing the actor (43%) dealt with virtues related to the handling of risks and the application of GM crops. The results of this study may help to structure the academic debate and contribute to a better understanding of moral concerns that are associated with the key aspects of the ethical theories of consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics.

Keywords

Gene technology Agriculture Consequentialism Deontology Virtue ethics Literature analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the University Research Priority Programme Ethics (Universitärer Forschungsschwerpunkt Ethik) of the Ethics-Center, University of Zurich, for financial support, and Bernhard Schmid, Roger Busch, Marc Hall and Oliver Jütersonke for providing valuable comments on the original manuscript. We also like to thank the reviewers for helpful comments on a previous version of this manuscript.

References

  1. Altmann, M., & Ammann, K. (1992). Gentechnologie im gesellschaftlichen Spannungsfeld: Züchtung transgener Kulturpflanzen. GAIA, 1(4), 204–213.Google Scholar
  2. Amin, L., Jahi, J., Nor, A. R., Osman, M., & Mahadi, N. M. (2007). Public acceptance of modern biotechnology. Asia Pacific Journal of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, 15(2), 39–51.Google Scholar
  3. Ammann, K., Jacot, Y., & Braun, R. (Eds.). (2003). Methods for risk assessment of transgenic plants, IV. Biodiversity and biotechnology. Basel: Birkhäuser Verlag.Google Scholar
  4. Annas, J. (2006). Virtue ethics. In D. Copp (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of ethical theory (pp. 515–536). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Atkinson, D. (2002). Agriculture–reconciling ancient tensions. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 2(2002), 52–58.Google Scholar
  6. Attfield, R. (2003). Environmental ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  7. Balzer, P., Rippe, K. P., & Schaber, P. (1998). Menschenwürde vs. Würde der Kreatur. München: Alber.Google Scholar
  8. Balzer, P., Rippe, K. P., & Schaber, P. (2000). Two concepts of dignity for humans and non-human organisms in the context of genetic engineering. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 13(1), 7–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beekman, V., & Brom, F. W. A. (2007). Ethical tools to support systematic public deliberations about the ethical aspects of agricultural biotechnologies. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 20(1), 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Birnbacher, D. (2007). Analytische Einführung in die Ethik. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bleisch, B., & Huppenbauer, M. (2011). Ethische Entscheidungsfindung. Ein Handbuch für die Praxis. Zürich: Versus Verlag.Google Scholar
  12. Böschen, S., Kastenhofer, K., Marschall, L., Rust, I., Soentgen, J., & Wehling, P. (2006). Scientific cultures of non-knowledge in the controversy over genetically modified organisms (GMO). GAIA, 15(4), 294–301.Google Scholar
  13. Brennan, A., & Y.-S. Lo. (2008). Environmental ethics. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, first published Mon Jun 3, 2002; substantive revision Thu Jan 3, 2008, plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-environmental/.Google Scholar
  14. Brink, D. O. (2006). Some forms and limits of consequentialism. In D. Copp (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of ethical theory (pp. 380–423). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Brookes, G., & Barfoot, P. (2005). GM crops: the global economic and environmental impact—the first nine years 1996–2004. AgBioForum, 8(2&3), 187–196.Google Scholar
  16. Brown, J. L., & Ping, Y. (2003). Consumer perception of risk associated with eating genetically engineered soybeans is less in the presence of a perceived consumer benefit. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 103(2), 208–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bruce, D. (2002a). A social contract for biotechnology: Shared visions for risky technologies? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 15(3), 279–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Bruce, D. (2002b). GM ethical decision making in practice. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 2(2002), 75–78.Google Scholar
  19. Bruce, D. (2003). Contamination, crop trials, and compatibility. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 16(6), 595–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Burkhardt, J. (2001). Agricultural biotechnology and the future benefits argument. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14(2), 135–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Busch, R. J., Knoepffler, N., Haniel, A., & Wenzel, G. (2002). Grüne Gentechnik. Ein Bewertungsmodell. München: Utz Verlag.Google Scholar
  22. Carr, S. (2002). Ethical and value-based aspects of the European commission’s precautionary principle. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 15(1), 31–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Carr, S., & Levidow, L. (2000). Exploring the links between science, risk, uncertainty, and ethics in regulatory controversies about genetically modified crops. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 12(1), 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Chen, M.-F., & Li, H.-L. (2007). The consumer’s attitude toward genetically modified foods in Taiwan. Food Quality and Preference, 18(4), 662–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Clark, E. A., & Lehmann, H. (2001). Assessment of GM crops in commercial agriculture. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14(1), 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Cohen, S. N. (1977). Recombinant DNA: Fact and fiction. Science, 195(4279), 654–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Comstock, G. (1989). Genetically engineered herbicide resistance, Part One. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 2(4), 263–306.Google Scholar
  28. Comstock, G. (1990). Genetically engineered herbicide resistance, Part Two. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 3(2), 114–146.Google Scholar
  29. Cooley, D. R., & Goreham, G. A. (2004). Are transgenic organisms unnatural? Ethics and The Environment, 9(1), 46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Cowgill, S. E., Danks, C., & Atkinson, H. J. (2004). Multitrophic interactions involving genetically modified potatoes, nontarget aphids, natural enemies and hyperparasitoids. Molecular Ecology, 13(3), 639–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Crisp, R. (2003). Modern moral philosophy and the virtues. In R. Crisp (Ed.), How should one live? Essays on the Virtues (pp. 1–18). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Deane-Drummond, C. E. (2002). Wisdom with justice. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 2(2002), 65–74.Google Scholar
  33. Deane-Drummond, C. E. (2004). The ethics of nature. Malden: Blackwell Publication.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Deblonde, M., & du Jardin, P. (2005). Deepening a precautionary European policy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 18(4), 319–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Deckers, J. (2005). Are scientists right and non-scientists wrong? Reflections on discussions of GM. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 18(5), 451–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Devos, Y., Maeseele, P., Reheul, D., van Speybroeck, L., & de Waele, D. (2008). Ethics in the societal debate on genetically modified organisms: A (re)quest for sense and sensibility. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 21(1), 29–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Dickson, D. (1980). Patenting living organisms—how to beat the bug-rustlers. Nature, 283(5743), 128–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Dobson, A. (1995). Biocentrism and genetic engineering. Environmental Values, 3(4), 227–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Dürnberger, C. (2008). Der Mythos der Ursprünglichkeit–Landwirtschaftliche Idylle und ihre Rolle in der öffentlichen Wahrnehmung. Forum TTN, 2008(19), 45–52.Google Scholar
  40. Duvick, D. N. (1995). Biotechnology is compatible with sustainable agriculture. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 8(2), 112–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Elliott, E. T., & Cole, C. V. (1989). A perspective on agroecosystem science. Ecology, 6(70), 1597–1602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Firbank, L. G., & Forcella, F. (2000). Genetically modified crops and farmland biodiversity. Science, 289(5484), 1481–1482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Forsberg, E.-M. (2007). Value pluralism and coherentist justification of ethical advice. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 20(1), 81–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Fraser, V. (2001). What’s the moral of the GM food story? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14(2), 147–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Frewer, L. J. (2003). Societal issues and public attitudes towards genetically modified foods. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 14(5–8), 319–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Frewer, L. J., Hedderley, D., Howard, C., & Shepherd, R. (1997a). ‘Objection’ mapping in determining group and individual concerns regarding genetic engineering. Agriculture and Human Values, 14(1), 67–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Frewer, L. J., Howard, C., & Shepherd, R. (1997b). Public concerns in the United Kingdom about general and specific applications of genetic engineering: Risk, benefit, and ethics. Science, Technology and Human Values, 22(1), 98–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Frewer, L. J., Lassen, J., Kettlitz, B., Scholderer, J., Beekman, V., & Berdal, K. G. (2004). Societal aspects of genetically modified foods. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 42(7), 1181–1193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ganiere, P., Chern, W., & Hahn, D. (2006). A continuum of consumer attitudes toward genetically modified foods in the United States. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 31(1), 129–149.Google Scholar
  50. Gaskell, G. (2000). Agricultural biotechnology and public attitudes in the European Union. AgBioForum, 3(2–3), 87–96.Google Scholar
  51. Gaskell, G., N. Allum, & S. Stares. (2003). Europeans and biotechnology in 2002—Eurobarometer 58.0 (2nd Edn. March 21st 2003). A report to the EC Directorate General for Research from the project ‘Life Sciences in European Society’ QLG7-CT-1999-00286.Google Scholar
  52. Gaskell, G., Allum, N., Bauer, M., Durant, J., Allansdottir, A., Bonfadelli, H., et al. (2000). Biotechnology and the European public. Nature Biotechnology, 18(9), 935–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Gaus, G. F. (2001a). What is deontology? Part one: Orthodox views. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 35(1), 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Gaus, G. F. (2001b). What is deontology? Part two: Reasons to act. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 35(2), 179–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Goga, B. T. C., & Clementi, F. (2002). Safety assurance of foods: Risk management depends on good science but it is not a scientific activity. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 15(3), 305–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Gonzalez, C. G. (2007). Genetically modified organisms and justice: The international environmental justice implications of biotechnology. Georgetown International Environmental Law Review, 19(4), 583–610.Google Scholar
  57. Gura, T. (2001). The battlefields of Britain. Nature, 412(6849), 760–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Hails, R. S. (2000). Genetically modified plants—the debate continues. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 15(1), 14–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Hails, R. S. (2002). Assessing the risks associated with new agricultural practices. Nature, 418(6898), 685–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Hansen, J., Holma, L., Frewer, L. J., Robinson, P., & Sandøe, P. (2003). Beyond the knowledge deficit: recent research into lay and expert attitudes to food risks. Appetite, 41(2), 111–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Harlander, S. K. (1991). Social, moral, and ethical issues in food biotechnology. Food Technology, 45(5), 152–159.Google Scholar
  62. Harwood, J. D., Wallin, W. G., & Obrycki, J. J. (2005). Uptake of Bt endotoxins by nontarget herbivores and higher order arthropod predators: Molecular evidence from a transgenic corn agroecosystem. Molecular Ecology, 14, 2815–2823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Heaf, D., & J. Wirz. (Eds.) (2002). Genetic engineering and the intrinsic value and integrity of animals and plants. Proceedings of a Workshop at the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh. Hafan: Ifgene.Google Scholar
  64. Heeger, R. (2000). Genetic engineering and the dignity of creatures. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 13(1), 43–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Henson, S., Annou, M., Cranfield, J., & Ryks, J. (2008). Understanding consumer attitudes toward food technologies in Canada. Risk Analysis, 28(6), 1601–1617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Herold, N. (2008). Pflicht ist Pflicht! Oder nicht? Eine Einführung in die Deontologische Ethik. In J. S. Ach, K. Bayertz, & L. Siep (Eds.), Grundkurs Ethik. Band 1: Grundlagen (pp. 71–90). Paderborn: Mentis Verlag.Google Scholar
  67. Ho, M.-W., Ryan, A., & Cummins, J. (1999). Cauliflower mosaic viral promoter—a recipe for disaster? Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease, 11(4), 194–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Hoban, T. J., Woodrum, E., & Czaja, R. (1992). Public opposition to genetic engineering. Rural Sociology, 57(4), 476–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Hoffman, C. A., & Carroll, C. R. (1995). Can we sustain the biological basis of agriculture? Annual Review of Ecology, Evolutionand Systematics, 26(1995), 69–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Holtug, N. (2001). The harm principle and genetically modified food. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14(2), 169–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Howard, J. A., & Donnelly, K. C. (2004). A quantitative safety assessment model for transgenic protein products produced in agricultural crops. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 17(6), 545–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Hursthouse, R. (2003). Normative virtue ethics. In R. Crisp (Ed.), How should one live? Essays on the virtues (pp. 19–36). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  73. Jensen, K. K. (2006). Conflict over risks in food production: A challenge for democracy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19(3), 269–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Kallhoff, A. (2002). Prinzipien der Pflanzenethik. Die Bewertung pflanzlichen Lebens in Biologie und Philosophie. New York: Frankfurt, Campus Verlag.Google Scholar
  75. Karafyllis, N. C. (2003). Renewable resources and the idea of nature—what has biotechnology got to do with it? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 16(1), 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Kasanmoentalib, S. (1996). Science and values in risk assessment: The case of deliberate release of genetically engineered organisms. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 9(1), 42–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Katz, E. (1993). Artefacts and functions: A note on the value of nature. Environmental Value, 2(3), 223–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Kinsey, J., & Senauer, B. (1997). Food marketing in an electronic age: Implications for agriculture. Choices, 12(2nd Quarter), 32–35.Google Scholar
  79. Kirkham, G. (2006). ‘Playing god’ and ‘vexing nature’: A cultural perspective. Environmental Values, 15(2), 173–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Korthals, M. (2001). Taking consumers seriously: Two concepts of consumer sovereignty. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14(2), 201–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Kotschi, J. (2008). Transgenic crops and their impact on biodiversity. GAIA., 17(1), 36–41.Google Scholar
  82. Krebs, J. R., Bradbury, R. B., Wilson, J. D., & Siriwardena, G. M. (1999). The second silent spring? Nature, 400(6753), 611–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Lammerts van Bueren, E., & Struik, P. (2005). Integrity and rights of plants: ethical notions in organic plant breeding and propagation. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 18(5), 479–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Madsen, K. H., & Sandøe, P. (2001). Herbicide resistant sugar beet—What is the problem? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14(2), 161–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Madsen, K. H., Holm, P. B., Lassen, J., & Sandøe, P. (2002). Ranking genetically modified plants according to familiarity. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 15(3), 267–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Magnusson, M. K., & Koivisto Hursti, U.-K. (2002). Consumer attitudes towards genetically modified foods. Appetite, 39(1), 9–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Marvier, M. (2002). Improving risk assessment for nontarget safety of transgenic crops. Ecological Applications, 12(4), 1119–1124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Marvier, M., & Van Acker, R. C. (2005). Can crop transgenes be kept on a leash? Frontiers in Ecology and Environment, 3(2), 99–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Mayer, S., & Stirling, A. (2002). Finding a precautionary approach to technological developments—lessons for the evaluation of GM crops. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 15(1), 57–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. McNaughton, D., & Rawling, P. (2006). Chapter 15. Deontology. In D. Copp (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of ethical theory (pp. 425–458). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  91. Meijboom, F. L. B., Verweij, M. F., & Brom, F. W. A. (2003). You eat what you are: moral dimensions of diets tailored to one’s genes. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 16(6), 557–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Melich, A. (2000). Modern biotechnology, quality of life, and consumers’ access to justice—eurobarometer 52.1 (Nov–Dec 1999). Conducted by INRA (Europe), Brussels. ICPSR02893-v4. Cologne, Germany: GESIS/Ann Arbor, MI. Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributors].Google Scholar
  93. Melin, A. (2004). Genetic engineering and the moral status of non-human species. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 17(6), 479–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Mepham, B. (2008). Bioethics. An introduction for the biosciences (Second edition ed.). Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  95. Munnichs, G. (2004). Whom to trust? Public concerns, late modern risks, and expert trustworthiness. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 17(2), 113–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Musschenga, A. (2005). Empirical ethics, context-sensitivity, and contextutalism. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 30(5), 467–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Myhr, A. I., & Traavik, T. (2002). The precautionary principle: scientific uncertainty and omitted research in the context of GMO use and release. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 15(1), 73–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Myhr, A. I., & Traavik, T. (2003a). Genetically modified (GM) crops: Precautionary science and conflicts of interests. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 16(3), 227–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Myhr, A. I., & Traavik, T. (2003b). Sustainable development and Norwegian genetic engineering regulations: Applications, impacts, and challenges. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 16(4), 317–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Myskja, B. K. (2006). The moral difference between intragenic and transgenic modification of plants. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19(3), 225–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Nisbet, M. C., & Huge, M. (2007). Where do science debates come from? Understanding attention cycles and framing. In D. Brossard, J. Shanahan, & T. C. Nesbitt (Eds.), The media, the public and agricultural biotechnology (pp. 193–230). London: CABI Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. O’Neill, J., Holland, A., & Light, A. (2006). Environmental values (Routledge Introductions to Environment). New York: Routledge Group.Google Scholar
  103. Osborn, D. (2002). Stretching the frontiers of precaution. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 2(2002), 37–41.Google Scholar
  104. Pascalev, A. (2003). You are what you eat: genetically modified foods, integrity, and society. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 16(6), 583–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Paula, L., & Birrer, F. (2006). Including public perspectives in industrial biotechnology and the biobased economy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19(3), 253–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Peters, H. P., & Sawicka, M. (2007). German reactions to genetic engineering in food production. In D. Brossard, J. Shanahan, & T. C. Nesbitt (Eds.), The public, the media and agricultural biotechnology (pp.57–96). Wallingford (UK): CABI Publishing.Google Scholar
  107. Pilson, D., & Prendeville, H. R. (2004). Ecological effects of transgenic crops and the escape of transgenes into wild populations. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 35(1), 149–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Pouteau, S. (2000). Beyond substantial equivalence: Ethical equivalence. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 13(3–4), 271–291.Google Scholar
  109. Ramjoué, C. (2007). The transatlantic rift in genetically modified food policy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 20(5), 419–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Regal, P. J. (1994). Scientific principles for ecologically based risk assessment of transgenic organisms. Molecular Ecology, 3(1), 5–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Reif, K., & A. Melich. (1996). Biotechnology and genetic engineering: What Europeans think about biotechnology—Eurobarometer 39.1 (First ICPSR Edition, April 1996). Conducted by INRA (Europe), Brussels. ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor, MI. Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer], Köln. Zentralarchiv für Empirische Sozialforschung/Ann Arbor, MI. Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributors].Google Scholar
  112. Reiss, M. J., & Straughan, R. (2002). Improving nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  113. Rippe, K. P., & Schaber, P. (1998). Einleitung. In K. P. Rippe & P. Schaber (Eds.), Tugendethik (pp. 7–18). Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam jun.Google Scholar
  114. Robinson, J. (1999). Ethics and transgenic crops: A review. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, 2(2), 71–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Rolston, H., I. I. I. (1999). Genes, genesis and god. Values and their origins in natural and human history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  116. Runtenberg, C. (1997). Argumentationen im Kontext angewandter Ethik: das Beispiel Gentechnologie. In N. Herold & S. Mischer (Eds.), Philosophie: Studium, Text und Argument (pp. 179–193). Münster: LIT-Verlag.Google Scholar
  117. Saba, A., Moles, A., & Frewer, L. J. (1998). Public concerns about general and specific applications of genetic engineering: a comparative study between the UK and Italy. Nutrition and Food Science, 98(1), 19–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Sandler, R. (2004). An aretaic objection to agricultural biotechnology. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 17(3), 301–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Sandler, R. (2007). Character and environment. A virtue-oriented approach to environmental ethics. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  120. Sandler, R., & Cafaro, P. (2004). Environmental virtue ethics. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  121. Saner, M. A. (2000). Biotechnology, the limits of Norton’s convergence hypothesis, and implications for an inclusive concept of health. Ethics and the Environment, 5(2), 229–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Savadori, L., Savio, S., Nicotra, E., Rumiati, R., Finucane, M., & Slovic, P. (2004). Expert and public perception of risk from biotechnology. Risk Analysis, 24(5), 1289–1299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Scott, I. M. (2000). Green symbolism in the genetic modification debate. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 13(3–4), 293–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Scott, D. (2003). Science and the consequences of mistrust: Lessons from recent GM controversies. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 16(6), 569–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Scott, D. (2005). The magic bullet criticism of agricultural biotechnology. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 18(3), 259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Segal, H. P. (2001). Victor and victim. Nature, 412(6850), 861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Serageldin, I. (1999). Biotechnology and food security in the 21st century. Science, 285(5426), 387–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Shelton, A. M., Zhao, J.-Z., & Roush, R. T. (2002). Economic, ecological, food safety, and social consequences of the deployment of Bt transgenic plants. Annual Review of Entomology, 47(2002), 845–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Siegrist, M. (2008). Factors influencing public acceptance of innovative food technologies and products. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 19(11), 603–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Siipi, H. (2008). Dimensions of naturalness. Ethics and the Environment, 13(1), 71–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Sjöberg, L. (2008). Genetically modified food in the eyes of the public and experts. Risk Management, 10(3), 168–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Skorupinski, B. (2002). Putting precaution to debate—about the precautionary principle and participatory technology assessment. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 15(1), 87–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Snow, A. (2003). Genetic engineering: Unnatural selection. Nature, 424(6949), 619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Stewart, C. N. (2004). Genetically modified planet. Environmental impacts of genetically engineered plants. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  135. Stöcklin, J. (2007). Die Pflanze. Moderne Konzepte der Biologie. Eidgenössische Ethikkommission für die Biotechnologie im Ausserhumanbereich EKAH (Eds.). Beiträge zur Ethik und Biotechnologie, Band 2.Google Scholar
  136. Tanner, C., Medin, D. L., & Iliev, R. (2008). Influence of deontological versus consequentialist orientations on act choices and framing effects: When principles are more important than consequences. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(5), 757–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Taylor, P. (1986). Respect for nature: A theory of environmental ethics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  138. Tiedje, J. M., Colwell, R. K., Grossman, Y. L., Hodson, R. E., Lenski, R. E., Mack, R. N., et al. (1989). The planned introduction of genetically engineered organisms: Ecological considerations and recommendations. Ecology, 70(2), 298–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Verhoog, H. (1992). The concept of intrinsic value and transgenic animals. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 5(2), 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Verhoog, H. (1997). Organic agriculture versus genetic engineering. In NJAS Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 54(4), 387–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Verhoog, H., Matze, M., van Bueren, E. L., & Baars, T. (2003). The role of the concept of the natural (naturalness) in organic farming. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 16(1), 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Vogel, S. (2003). The nature of artifacts. Environmental Ethics, 25(2), 149–168.Google Scholar
  143. von Kutschera, F. (1999). Grundlagen der Ethik. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Von Wartburg, W. P., & Liew, J. (1999). Gene technology and social acceptance. Lanham, Md: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  145. Wambugu, F. (1999). Why Africa needs agricultural biotech. Nature, 400(6739), 15–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Watkinson, A. R., Freckleton, R. P., Sutherland, W. J., & Robinson, R. A. (2000). Predictions of biodiversity response to genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. Science, 289(5484), 1554–1557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Weaver, S. A., & Morris, M. C. (2005). Risks associated with genetic modification: an annotated bibliography of peer reviewed natural science publications. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 18(2), 157–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Wenz, P. S. (1999). Pragmatism in practice: The efficiency of sustainable agriculture. Environmental Ethics, 21(4), 391–410.Google Scholar
  149. Westra, L. (1998). Biotechnology and transgenics in agriculture and aquaculture: The perspective from ecosystem integrity. Environmental Values, 7(1), 79–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Woese, C. R. (2004). A New biology for a new century. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 68(2), 173–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Wolfenbarger, L. L., & Phifer, P. R. (2000). The ecological risks and benefits of genetically engineered plants. Science, 290(5499), 2088–2093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel Gregorowius
    • 1
    • 2
  • Petra Lindemann-Matthies
    • 1
  • Markus Huppenbauer
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental StudiesUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Centre for EthicsUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations