Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Feasibility and Justice: The Need for Diverse Innovation Streams

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Social Justice and Agricultural Innovation

  • 187 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter argues that a first major step towards changing how natural and social environments are treated is to counter the tolerance of short-term extractivism by linking our innate desires to build a home with long-term commitments to the continuity of biocultures. To establish social and environmental sustainability, the six-dimensional social justice perspective is treated as the baseline for the future design of agricultural innovation policies. After applying this framework to three current problem fields, the chapter discusses possible commitments to political feasibility and their limitations, and concludes by suggesting some research lines for future work.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Altieri, Miguel A., Fernando R. Funes-Monzote, and Paulo Petersen. 2012. Agroecologically efficient agricultural systems for smallholder farmers: Contributions to food sovereignty. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 32 (1): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anthony, Raymond. 2013. Animistic pragmatism and native ways of knowing: Adaptive strategies for overcoming the struggle for food in the sub-Arctic. International Journal of Circumpolar Health 72: 21224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, Henry. 2014. Food sovereignty via the ‘peasant way’: A sceptical view. Journal of Peasant Studies 41 (6): 1031–1063. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2013.852082.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, Wendell. 1977/2015. The unsettling of America: Culture & agriculture. Berkeley: Counterpoint Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borlaug, Norman E. 2000. Ending world hunger. The promise of biotechnology and the threat of antiscience zealotry. Plant Physiology 124 (2): 487–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bottazzi, Patrick. 2019. Work and social-ecological transitions: A critical review of five contrasting approaches. Sustainability 11 (14): 3852.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bragdon, Susan H. 2016. Reinvigorating the public sector: The case of food security, small-scale farmers, trade and intellectual property rules. Development 59 (3–4): 280–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlisle, Liz, Maywa Montenegro de Wit, Marcia S. DeLonge, Alastair Iles, Adam Calo, Christy Getz, Joanna Ory, Katherine Munden-Dixon, Ryan Galt, and Brett Melone. 2019. Transitioning to sustainable agriculture requires growing and sustaining an ecologically skilled workforce. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 3: 96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carolan, Michael. 2018. The real cost of cheap food. Oxon & New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danaher, John. 2019. Automation and Utopia: Human flourishing in a world without work. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • de Castro, Josué. 1961. Geografía Del Hambre. Santiago de Chile: Editorial Universitaria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumont, Antoinette M, Gaëtan Vanloqueren, Pierre M Stassart, and Philippe V Baret. 2016. Clarifying the socio-economic dimensions of agroecology: Between principles and practices. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems 40 (1): 24–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • ETC Group. 2008. Who owns nature?: Corporate power and the final frontier in the commodification of life. Ottawa: ETC Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fadda, Carlo. 2016. “The farmer’s role in creating new genetic diversity.” In Farmers’ Crop Varieties and Farmers’ Rights, ed. Michael Halewood, 57–70. Oxon & New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folke, Carl, Åsa Jansson, Johan Rockström, Per Olsson, Stephen R. Carpenter, F. Stuart Chapin, Anne-Sophie. Crépin, Gretchen Daily, Kjell Danell, and Jonas Ebbesson. 2011. Reconnecting to the biosphere. Ambio 40 (7): 719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Funes-Monzote, Fernando. 2008. “Farming like we're here to stay: The mixed farming alternative for Cuba.” PhD thesis, Wagenigen University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilabert, Pablo, and Holly Lawford-Smith. 2012. Political feasibility: A conceptual exploration. Political Studies 60 (4): 809–825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glover, Dominic, James Sumberg, Giel Ton, Jens Andersson, and Lone Badstue. 2019. “Rethinking technological change in smallholder agriculture.” Outlook on Agriculture 48 (3): 169–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, Daniel J. 2017. Genetically modified crops, inclusion, and democracy. Perspectives on Science 25 (4): 488–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilmi, Angela. 2018. “Peasant farming as a source of life.” Development 61: 122–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamieson, Dale. 1994. Global environmental justice. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements 36: 199–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jauernig, Johanna, Ingo Pies, Paul B. Thompson, and Vladislav Valentinov. 2019. Theorizing agriculture-society tensions: An ordonomic approach to the agrarian vision. In Sustainable governance and management of food systems: Ethical perspectives, ed. Eija Vinnari and Markus Vinnari, 634–657. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korthals, Michiel. 2018. Is Intensive farming ethically acceptable? Annals of Advanced Agricultural Sciences 2 (2): 15–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnamurthy, Meena. 2015. (White) Tyranny and the democratic value of distrust. The Monist 98 (4): 391–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackey, Brendan, and David Claudie. 2015. Points of contact: Integrating traditional and scientific knowledge for biocultural conservation. Environmental Ethics 37 (3): 341–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazoyer, Marcel, and Laurence Roudart. 2006. A history of world agriculture: From the neolithic age to the current crisis. New York: Monthy Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McIntyre, Beverly D., Hans R. Herren, Judi Wakhungu, and Robert T. Watson. 2009. International assessment of agricultural knowledge, science and technology for development (IAASTD): Synthesis report with executive summary: A synthesis of the global and sub-global IAASTD reports. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMichael, Anthony. 2017. Climate change and the health of nations: Famines, fevers, and the fate of populations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morsink, Johannes. 1999. The universal declaration of human rights: Origins, drafting, and intent. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nyéléni Forum for Food Sovereignty. 2007. Declaration of Nyéléni. Sélingue: Nyéléni Forum for Food Sovereignty.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patel, Raj. 2013. The long green revolution. The Journal of Peasant Studies 40 (1): 1–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patel, Raj, and Jason W. Moore. 2017. A history of the world in seven cheap things: A guide to capitalism, nature, and the future of the planet. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Preston, Christopher J., and Fern Wickson. 2016. Broadening the lens for the governance of emerging technologies: Care ethics and agricultural biotechnology. Technology in Society 45: 48–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reiss, Julian, and Philip Kitcher. 2009. “Biomedical research, neglected diseases, and well-ordered science.” THEORIA. Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 24 (3): 263–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rozzi, Ricardo. 2013. “Biocultural Ethics: From Biocultural Homogenization Toward Biocultural Conservation.” In Linking Ecology and Ethics for a Changing World: Values, Philosophy, and Action, ed. Ricardo Rozzi, S. T. A. Pickett, Clare Palmer, Juan J. Armesto and J. Baird Callicott, 9–32. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rydin, Yvonne, Ana Bleahu, Michael Davies, Julio D. Dávila, Sharon Friel, Giovanni De Grandis, Nora Groce, Pedro C. Hallal, Ian Hamilton, and Philippa Howden-Chapman. 2012. Shaping cities for health: Complexity and the planning of urban environments in the 21st century. the Lancet 379 (9831): 2079–2108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlosberg, David. 2013. Theorising environmental justice: The expanding sphere of a discourse. Environmental Politics 22 (1): 37–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schutter, De., and Olivier. 2017. The political economy of food systems reform. European Review of Agricultural Economics 44 (4): 705–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, Amartya. 1981. Poverty and famines. An essay on entitlement and deprivation. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiva, Vandana, and Poonam Pandey. 2006. Biodiversity based organic farming: A new paradigm for food security and food safety. New Dehli: Navdanya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinvorth, Ulrich. 2009. The right to work and the right to develop one’s capabilities. Analyse & Kritik 1: 101–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stojanovic, Milutin. 2019. Biomimicry in Agriculture: Is the ecological system-design model the future agricultural paradigm? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 32 (5–6): 789–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Associated Press. 2019. “Activists cheer victory in landmark Dutch climate case.” The New York Times. Accessed December 20, 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2019/12/20/business/bc-eu-netherlands-climate-case.html.

  • Timmermann, Cristian, and Georges F. Félix. 2015. Agroecology as a vehicle for contributive justice. Agriculture and Human Values 32 (3): 523–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timmermann, Cristian, Georges F. Félix, and Pablo Tittonell. 2018. Food sovereignty and consumer sovereignty: Two antagonistic goals? Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems 42 (3): 274–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2017.1359807.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tittonell, Pablo. 2013. Farming systems ecology: Towards ecological intensification of world agriculture. Wageningen: Wageningen Universiteit.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights. 2006. General Comment No. 17: The Right of Everyone to Benefit from the Protection of the Moral and Material Interests Resulting from any Scientific, Literary or Artistic Production of Which He or She is the Author (Art. 15, Para. 1 (c) of the Covenant, E/C.12/GC/17). Geneva: United Nations Economic and Social Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Belt, Henk. 2003. “Enclosing the genetic commons: biopatenting on a global scale.” In Patente am Leben? Ethische, rechtliche und politische Aspekte der Biopatentierung, ed. Christoph Baumgartner and Dietmar Mieth, 229–243. Paderborn: mentis.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Belt, Henk. 2009. Playing god in Frankenstein’s footsteps: Synthetic biology and the meaning of life. Nanoethics 3 (3): 257–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-009-0079-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Interdisciplinary Center for Studies in Bioethics, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile

    Cristian Timmermann

Authors
  1. Cristian Timmermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cristian Timmermann .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Timmermann, C. (2020). Feasibility and Justice: The Need for Diverse Innovation Streams. In: Social Justice and Agricultural Innovation. The International Library of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Ethics, vol 31. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56193-2_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation