https://ebookmass.com/product/agricultures-ethicalhorizon-3rd-edition-robert-l-zimdahl/
Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) ready for you
Download now and discover formats that fit your needs...
Our Sexuality 14th Edition Robert L. Crooks
https://ebookmass.com/product/our-sexuality-14th-edition-robert-lcrooks/
ebookmass.com
Applied Fluid Mechanics 7th Edition Robert L. Mott
https://ebookmass.com/product/applied-fluid-mechanics-7th-editionrobert-l-mott/
ebookmass.com
Introductory CIrcuIt AnalysIs, 14th Global Edition
Robert L. Boylestad
https://ebookmass.com/product/introductory-circuit-analysis-14thglobal-edition-robert-l-boylestad/
ebookmass.com
The Temporality of Determinacy: Functional Relations in Metaphysics and Science Conor Husbands
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-temporality-of-determinacyfunctional-relations-in-metaphysics-and-science-conor-husbands/
ebookmass.com
A Três passos do ouro: Saiba como transformar obstáculos em oportunidades. Napoleon Hill
https://ebookmass.com/product/a-tres-passos-do-ouro-saiba-comotransformar-obstaculos-em-oportunidades-napoleon-hill/
ebookmass.com
Chronic Coronary Artery Disease 1st Edition Edition James Delemos And Torbjorn Omland (Auth.)
https://ebookmass.com/product/chronic-coronary-artery-disease-1stedition-edition-james-delemos-and-torbjorn-omland-auth/
ebookmass.com
Introduction to the Finite Element Method 4E 4th Edition Reddy
https://ebookmass.com/product/introduction-to-the-finite-elementmethod-4e-4th-edition-reddy/
ebookmass.com
Lucas Brothers Box Set : Books 1-4 Jordan Marie
https://ebookmass.com/product/lucas-brothers-box-set-books-1-4-jordanmarie/
ebookmass.com
Constitutional Law [Connected Casebook] (Aspen Casebook) New Edition
https://ebookmass.com/product/constitutional-law-connected-casebookaspen-casebook-new-edition/
ebookmass.com
Basic Geriatric Nursing 8th Edition Patricia A. Williams
https://ebookmass.com/product/basic-geriatric-nursing-8th-editionpatricia-a-williams/
ebookmass.com
Agriculture’sEthicalHorizon
RobertL.Zimdahl
ColoradoStateUniversity,FortCollins, CO,UnitedStates
Elsevier
Radarweg29,POBox211,1000AEAmsterdam,Netherlands TheBoulevard,LangfordLane,Kidlington,OxfordOX51GB,UnitedKingdom 50HampshireStreet,5thFloor,Cambridge,MA02139,UnitedStates
Copyright©2022ElsevierInc.Allrightsreserved.
Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproducedortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans, electronicormechanical,includingphotocopying,recording,oranyinformationstorageand retrievalsystem,withoutpermissioninwritingfromthepublisher.Detailsonhowtoseek permission,furtherinformationaboutthePublisher’spermissionspoliciesandour arrangementswithorganizationssuchastheCopyrightClearanceCenterandtheCopyright LicensingAgency,canbefoundatourwebsite: www.elsevier.com/permissions .
Thisbookandtheindividualcontributionscontainedinitareprotectedundercopyrightby thePublisher(otherthanasmaybenotedherein).
Notices
Knowledgeandbestpracticeinthisfieldareconstantlychanging.Asnewresearchand experiencebroadenourunderstanding,changesinresearchmethods,professionalpractices, ormedicaltreatmentmaybecomenecessary.
Practitionersandresearchersmustalwaysrelyontheirownexperienceandknowledgein evaluatingandusinganyinformation,methods,compounds,orexperimentsdescribed herein.Inusingsuchinformationormethodstheyshouldbemindfuloftheirownsafety andthesafetyofothers,includingpartiesforwhomtheyhaveaprofessionalresponsibility.
Tothefullestextentofthelaw,neitherthePublishernortheauthors,contributors,or editors,assumeanyliabilityforanyinjuryand/ordamagetopersonsorpropertyasamatter ofproductsliability,negligenceorotherwise,orfromanyuseoroperationofanymethods, products,instructions,orideascontainedinthematerialherein.
BritishLibraryCataloguing-in-PublicationData
AcataloguerecordforthisbookisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
AcatalogrecordforthisbookisavailablefromtheLibraryofCongress
ISBN:978-0-12-823667-3
ForInformationonallElsevierpublications visitourwebsiteat https://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals
Publisher: CharlotteCockle
AcquisitionsEditor: NancyJ.Maragioglio
EditorialProjectManager: CharlotteRowley
ProductionProjectManager: KiruthikaGovindaraju
CoverDesigner: GregHarris
TypesetbyMPSLimited,Chennai,India
Acknowledgments—Firstedition
Dr.JamesW.Boyd,ProfessorofPhilosophy,ColoradoStateUniversity,hasbeena friendandmentorformorethan30years.Hewasthefirsttoacquaintmewiththe intricaciesofphilosophyandtheimportanceofcontinuingtoaskdifficultquestions.Iamindebtedtohimforshowingmehowtoexploretheethicsofweedscienceandagricultureandforleadingmetonewapproachestowhatcouldbedone tosolveproblemsofweedmanagementinagriculture.
Mr.R.LeeSpeer,SeniorLecturer,DepartmentofPhilosophy,ColoradoState University,hasbeenafriendandteachingcompanion.Hetaughtmeaswetriedto teachstudentshowtothinkaboutagriculture’sethicaldilemmas.Thisbookcould nothavebeencreatedwithoutLee’sguidanceandpatience.HehasbeenmycoteacherandIwashisstudent.
Dr.ThomasO.Holtzer,ProfessorofEntomologyandDepartmentHead, DepartmentofBioagriculturalSciencesandPestManagement,ColoradoState University,hasmadethisworkpossible.Hepermittedandsupportedmychangein scholarlyemphasisfromweedsciencetophilosophyandagriculturalethics.His administrativesupportallowedmetolearnanewfieldwhilesignificantlydiminishingmyroutineresearcheffortsinweedscience.
Acknowledgmentsare,bycustom,brief.Tofullyacknowledgethecontributions ofthethreecolleaguesabove,Iwouldhavetomakethemcoauthors.
Ithankthosewhoreviewedallorpartsofthemanuscriptandwhosecomments improvedit.TheyincludeCynthiaS.Brown,DepartmentofBioagricultural SciencesandPestManagement,ColoradoStateUniversity;HenryA.Cross, ProfessorEmeritus,DepartmentofPsychology,ColoradoStateUniversity;RuthA. Hufbauer,DepartmentofBioagriculturalSciencesandPestManagement,Colorado StateUniversity;JackPaxton,Retired,DepartmentofCropandSoilSciences, UniversityofIllinois;andEdwardE.Schweizer,Retired,USDA/ARS,FortCollins, CO.Theinsightfulcommentsoffiveanonymousreviewersimprovedthemanuscriptsignificantly.
SpecialthanksareowedtoDavidBelleswhoprovidedregular,prompt,and accurateresearchassistance.
Thecontinuedsupportandloveofmywife,Pam,havebeenessentialtothis effort.
Acknowledgments—Second edition
Manyofthethoughtsandargumentsinbotheditionsofthisbookwerecreatedand nurturedovermanyyearsinclassesIhavetaughtandothersIhaveattended,during seminars,professionalmeetings,andinnumerousconversationswithcolleagues. Allthesetookplaceoverseveralyearsandwithfartoomanypeopletolistthem all.Iamindebtedtoallwhohavegivenmetheprivilegeofsharingtheirthoughts, evenwhenweknewwedidnotagree.Imustoffermyspecialappreciationto Dr.JamesW.Boyd,ProfessorEmeritusofPhilosophy,ColoradoStateUniversity, whoremainsavaluedfriendandphilosophicalmentor.Dr.ThomasO.Holtzer, ProfessorofEntomologyandHead,DepartmentofBioagriculturalSciencesand PestManagement,ColoradoStateUniversity,hassupportedandadvocatedmy workandprovidedofficespaceanddepartmentaladministrativesupport.Hiscarefulreviewsofportionsofthemanuscripthavebeenespeciallyhelpful.Dr.Bernard E.Rollin’sandDr.TerryEngle’scommentsonChapter10wereespeciallyhelpful. IexpressmygratitudetoMs.MaggieHirkoandMs.JanetDillwhohavemade mytaskmorepleasantandeasierbytheircourtesy,regularassistance,andtolerance ofmy,perhapstoofrequent,requestsforassistance.
Mywife,PamelaJ.Zimdahl,encouragedmywritingandofferedcommentsand criticismwhenshethoughtitwasappropriate(itusuallywas).
Acknowledgments—Thirdedition
Dr.JamesW.Boyd,ProfessorofPhilosophy,ColoradoStateUniversity,hasbeena friendandmentorformorethan50years.Hewasthefirsttoacquaintmewiththe intricaciesofphilosophyandtheimportanceofcontinuingtoaskdifficultquestions.Ihavebenefittedfromhisguidancetowardabetterunderstandingofmoral philosophyandthestudyofagriculturalethics.Hehasbeenaconsistent,careful, andchallengingreviewer.
ImustacknowledgethecontinuinginfluenceofLeeSpeer(deceased),Senior Lecturer,DepartmentofPhilosophy,ColoradoStateUniversity.Hewasafriend andteachingcompanionwhotaughtmeaswetaughtstudentshowtothinkabout agriculture’sethicaldilemmas.Hehasinfluencedeacheditionofthisbook.Hewas mycoteacher,andIwashisstudent.
Dr.ThomasO.Holtzer,RetiredProfessorofEntomologyandDepartmentHead, DepartmentofBioagriculturalSciencesandPestManagement,ColoradoState University,supportedmychangeinscholarlyemphasisfromweedsciencetophilosophyandagriculturalethics.
Iamindebtedtoallwhohavegivenmetheprivilegeofsharingtheirthoughts, evenwhenweknewwedidnotagree.IoffermyspecialappreciationtoMr.Fritz Galt,Honolulu,Hawaii;Dr.DavidW.Lehman,FortCollins,CO;Dr.PaulB. Thompson,ProfessorofPhilosophy,andtheW.K.KelloggChairofAgricultural, FoodandCommunityEthicsatMichiganStateUniversity;Dr.A.WayneViney, ProfessorofPsychology,Emeritus,ColoradoStateUniversity;and.Dr.Benjamin Withers,Dean,CollegeofLiberalArts,ColoradoStateUniversity.
Ithankmymanyfriendswhoperhapsunknowntothemhavehelpedmeso much.Theirfriendship,love,conversations,andourtimestogetherhavehelpedme focusandpersistasIhavetriedtoclarifymythoughts.Finally,IthankRandy, Michelle,Jennifer,Fritz,andBobwhoselovehasalwaysbeenpresent,evenonthe darkdays.
Foreword—Thirdeditionix
Foreword—Secondeditionxv Foreword—Firsteditionxix Prefacexxvii
Acknowledgments—Thirdeditionxxxix Acknowledgments—Secondeditionxli Acknowledgments—Firsteditionxliii Listofhighlightsforeachchapterxlv
1Thehorizonofagriculturalethics1 ATruthmodels3 BGuidingmyths4 CScientificagriculture6 DThecatharticquestions12 References13
2Theconductofagriculturalscience17 AWhatresearchoughttobedone?27 References31
3Whenthingsgowrong—balancingtechnology’ssafetyandrisk35 AThechemicaleraofagriculture36 BProgressofweedscience41 CChallenges44 1Environmentalconcern44 2Scienceandtechnology45 3Herbicideresistance47 4Agriculturalexamples51 5Scientificerrors52 DThecontinuingdebate54 EAppointmentinSamarra57 References58
4Abriefintroductiontomoralphilosophyandethicaltheories63 AScienceandemotion68 BUniversalvalues69 CEthicsinagriculture72
DContemporarynormativeethics73
EMoraltheoriesrelevanttoagriculture75
1Ethicalegoism75
2Socialcontracttheory76
3Virtuetheory78
4Deontological—Kantianethics80
5Utilitarianism82
FApplyingethicstoagricultureandagriculturalscience84
GMultiplestrategiesutilitarianism88 References91
5Moralconfidenceinagriculture95
AThebenefitsandcostsofmodernagriculture96
BGoalsforagriculture104
1Socialgoalsforagriculture104
2Environmentalgoalsforagriculture106
CExpandingagriculture’smoralscope109
1Theutilitarianstandard110
DTherelevanceofthewesternagriculturalmodel113
EBottom-linethinking114 FConclusion115 References118
6Therelevanceofethicstoagriculture123 References133
7Agriculturalsustainability135
AThepresentagriculturalsituation137
BTheexampleofweedmanagement139
1Pesticidepoisoning144
2Abroadercontext145
CWhatissustainability?147
DWhymustsustainabilitybeachieved?149
EThemoralcaseforsustainability154
FAconcludingcommentaboutsustainableweedscience158 References160
8Agriculturalbiotechnology—opportunitiesandstrengths165
AThedebate166 1Favorableviews170
BTechnologicalproblems170
CSubstantialequivalence171
DArgumentsinfavorofagriculturalbiotechnology176
1Presentachievements177
2Futureobjectives177
3Afewspecificexamples178 ETheenvironment184 References185
9Agriculturalbiotechnology—challengesandcautions191 AThedebate191 BArgumentsopposedtoagriculturalbiotechnology192 1Feedingtheworld194 2Harmtohumanhealth196 3Harmtotheenvironment198
4Transgenictechnologyandsustainableagriculturalsystems202
5Theroleoflargecompanies207 CMoralarguments208
1LabelingandbiotechnologyintheUnitedStatesandtheEU210 2Affectsonfamilyfarms213 3Academicindustryrelationships216 4Transgenicpharming217
5ThePrecautionaryPrinciple218 References220
10Alternative/organicagriculturalsystems227
ACharacteristicsofalternative/organicsystems230 1Agroecological/Ecological231 2Biodynamic231 3Conservation231 4Organic231 5Regenerative232 BFarmersandproductivity232 CTransitionandadvantages236 DVerticalagriculture239 EEthicalproblems240 References243
11Animalagriculture247 AWesternthoughtandtheline247 BAperson249 CArgumentsinsupportofanimalagriculture251 1Sustainability251 2Environment252 3Efficiency252 4Competition253 5By-products253 6Nonfooduses253 7Wealth253 8Risk253
Inonesense,thecurrenteraofagriculturalethicsbeganinthe1970swhenGlenn L.Johnson,anagriculturaleconomistknownforhisworkonassetfixity,tooka sabbaticalatOxfordUniversitytoworkwithseveralphilosophersthere.Theresult wasaseriesofpaperscallingforanewareaofexplicitandlogicallycriticalexpositionofthevaluesunderlyingappliedandproblem-solvingresearchintheagriculturalsciences (1976,1982).Onecouldalsoarguethattherehasbeenacontinuous andunbrokenstringofethicalandphilosophicalreflectionsonagriculturethatcan bedatedbackatleasttoXeonophon’s oeconomicus inthefourthcenturyBC.Here, onewouldtraceasuccessioninthetwentiethcenturythatnotesthewritingsof LibertyHydeBailey,LouisBromfield,andWendellBerry.Bailey(1858 1954), bestknownasataxonomistandforhisleadershipastheDeanofAgricultureat CornellUniversity,wasalmostcertainlytheleadingagriculturalscientistofhis generation.Inadditiontohismanyscientificpublications,hecontributedanumber ofreflectivephilosophicalessays,including TheHolyEarth andhisworkforthe TheodoreRooseveltadministration’sCommissiononCountryLife.
LouisBromfield(1896 1956)wasanovelistandHollywoodscreenwriterwho turnedhispentofarmingafterreturningtohisOhiohomelandinthe1940s.During the1950shebecameapotentspokesmanforconservationandthevaluesofrural life,buthiswritingsarelittleappreciatedtoday.WendellBerry(born1934)isthe currentgeneration’sBromfield.TheKentuckypoetandnovelisthasperhaps becomebestknownforhiswritingsonfarmingandconservation.ButBaileywasa leadingagriculturalscientistinhisownright,andBromfieldworkedcloselywith agriculturalscientistssuchasHughHammondBennett(1881 1960),thefatherof soilconservationintheUnitedStates.Berry,incontrast,largelyhasbeenostracized fromtheagriculturalscienceestablishment.Histrenchantcritiqueofland-grantuniversityscienceandeducationinthe 1977 book TheUnsettlingofAmerica caused himtobeperceivedasanenemybythoseagriculturalscientistswhowereawareof him.ForreasonsthatRobertZimdahlmakesclearinthisvolume,mostfacultyat agriculturaluniversitiesinthe1970sand1980ssimplyignoredBerry.
ThetransitionfromBaileytoBerryisthussignificant,andtheneglectthatpostwaragriculturalscienceshowedforethicswasacentralpointofanalysisnotonly forJohnson’sessaysofthe1970s,butalsoforthisextendedandsystematicstudy byZimdahl.JohnsonandZimdahlbothemphasizetheriseofpositivismasaphilosophyofsciencewithinagriculturaluniversitiesandresearchorganizations. Positivismcanbesuccinctlydefinedastheviewthatagriculturalscientistsshould confinetheiractivitytothecollectionofempiricaldataandtotheanalysisofquantifiablerelationshipsamongdata.Itis,ontheonehand,clearthatagricultural
scientistshaveneversoconfinedthemselves.IfNormanBorlaugistheprototypical agriculturalscientistofthelatetwentiethcentury,onemustnotehistirelessworkto ensurethatmodernmaize,rice,andwheatvarietiesresponsivetofertilizerwould besupportedbygovernmentandacceptedbyfarmers,nottomentionhispublic advocacyonbehalfofthegreenrevolution(see Borlaug,2000).Ontheotherhand, itisundeniablethatsustained,criticaldebateoverthegoalsofagriculturalscience hasbeenexceedinglyrareduringBorlaug’sprofessionallifetime.Positivismisthe philosophythatholdsthatsuchdebatehasnoplaceinscience.Totheextentthat scientistssuchasBorlaugcampaignonbehalfoftheirpreferredvisionofagriculture,itisconsideredtobeanextra-scientificactivity,anecessaryevil,perhaps,but innosensepartandparcelofthescientificprocessitself.
AsIhavearguedelsewhere(Thompson,2004),thisbrandofpositivismhadits philosophicalrootsinashort-livedphilosophicalmovementassociatedwiththe ViennaCirclephilosophersMorritzSchlick(1882 1936),RudolphCarnap(1891 1970),andKurtGodel(1906 1978),amongothers.TheViennaCirclephilosopherswereactiveinthe1920sandearly1930s,butthisphilosophicalmovement mayhavehaditsgreatestinfluenceoverpostWorldWarIIthroughasinglebook, A.J.Ayer’s Language,TruthandLogic,publishedin 1936.Thekeyphilosophical doctrinerestsonatheoryofmeaningthathadbeenpromulgatedbyGottlobFrege (1848 1925),accordingtowhichthe“sense”ofawordorsentencemustbedistinguishedfromthethingorstateofaffairstowhichitrefers.AsAyer(1910 1989) expressedit,statementsaremeaningfulonlyifoneoftwoconditionshold:they expresspurelyconceptualrelationshipsthatariseinvirtueofdefinitions(themental “sense”)giventoterms,ortheycorrespondto(thatis,describe)possiblestatesof theworld.Ayerproposeda“verificationprinciple”fordeterminingwhethersentencesmetthesecond,empiricalcriterionformeaning,towit,thatallempirically meaningfulsentences,inprinciple,arecapableofbeingdeterminedtrueorfalse throughthecollectionandanalysisofdata.Oneconsequenceofthisviewwasthat sentencesexpressingnormsorvaluesweredeemedneithertruenorfalse,but “meaningless.”Thepositivistsdenigratedsuchtalk,labelingitas“metaphysics,” andimplyingthatitwastantamounttotheoutdatedsuperstitionofabygoneera.
Thisformofpositivismhashadaprofoundimpactonthehistoryofscience sinceWorldWarII.Ithasvindicatedcountlessdecisionsbyjournaleditors,tenure, promotion,andreviewcommittees,nottomentionindividualscientists,who rejectedandrepressedthemselvesortheircolleagueswhentheyengagedinspeculative,philosophical,andreflectiveexercisesonthegroundsthatsuchactivitiesare “notscience.”Infact,theViennaCirclephilosopherswhosurvivedthewarand enjoyeddistinguishedcareersintheUnitedStateshaddiscoveredahostofproblemsintheverificationprincipleby1950.Eachhadsignificantlymodifiedtheir views,adoptingaformofpragmatismthatrecognizesthevalue-ladencharacterof knowledge,asdidAyerhimself.Nevertheless, Language,TruthandLogic was assignedwidelyinclassroomswellintothe1980s,andundoubtedlyhadaprofound influenceonthephilosophicalviewsofscientistswhowereeducatedinthe50-year periodfollowingitsoriginalpublicationinthe1930s.
TheotherbookofphilosophythatwasespeciallyinfluentialwasKarlPopper’s LogicofScientificDiscovery ,publishedin1935andtranslatedintoEnglishin 1959.Here,Popperputsforththeviewthatscienceprogressesnotthroughverification,butthroughfalsification,byeliminatinghypothesesthatareinconsistentwith datacollectedthroughexperiments.Popper’scharacterizationofscientificlogic alsoyieldedtheviewthatscienceproperlyisoccupiedwiththeformulationof hypothesesthatpredictspecificoutcomes.Althoughsuchhypothesesarenot “proven”whenthepredictedoutcomesmaterialize,thefailureofapredictionfalsifiesthehypothesisinquestion.Crucially,hypothesesincapableofsuchfalsifying testscannotbecharacterizedasproperlyscientificonPopper’sview.Althoughthe viewthatscienceproperlyisconcernedwiththecollectionofdataandtheanalysis ofrelationsamongdatarestsjointlyonthepositivistrejectionofmetaphysicsand onPopper’smoresophisticatedcharacterizationofprogressthroughfalsification, Popperwasoneofthemostseverecriticsoftheverificationprinciplefromthevery outset.Inpart,hiscriticismfocusedonhisviewthatprovingfalsewasmoreimportantthanprovingtrue,buthealsobelievedthatonewouldneverbeabletoactually conductfalsifyingexperimentswithoutalsoengaginginphilosophicalarguments intendedtoframeandcontextualizeempiricalresearch,includingdebatesover which experimentstoconductand how toconductthem.ThereisaworldofdifferencebetweenPopper’sbeliefthatethicalnormscannotbesubjectedtologically decisivefalsifyingtestsandthebeliefthattheyarewhollymeaningless.
Popperwasright.Sciencecannotbedonewithoutphilosophy,andthisphilosophyincludesethics.Infact,thestatementthatscientistsshouldconfinethemselves tothecollectionandanalysisofdataisanethicalnorm,anormfortheconductof inquiry.Suchnormscannotbecomewidelyestablishedinscientificpracticewithout asignificantamountofphilosophicaldiscussionandargument.Thus,inadditionto thevalue-ladencampaigningforwhichNormanBorlaugissowellknown,there havebeencountlessconversationsandexchangesinwhichscientistshaveestablishedthepositivisttenetasanethicalprincipleforinquiryintheagricultural sciences.Infact,thejournaleditorsandtenurecommitteeswhohaveimposedthis normofpracticehavenotsucceededineliminatingmetaphysics,ethics,andphilosophyfromscientificdisciplines.Theyhavesucceededonlyinexpungingsuchphilosophicalreflectionfromthescientificrecord.Theresultisthatasignificant amountoftheworkthatwasnecessarytomakesciencepossibleinthelasthalfof thetwentiethcenturycannotbepasseddowntothepresentgeneration,norcanitbe broughtbeforeapublicanxioustobelievethatscienceisconductedaccordingtoa disciplineoflogic,honesty,andadherencetostandardsofrigor.
Theactualphilosophyofscientificpracticefortheperiodinwhichtheagriculturaldisciplinestooktheirpresentshapeisthusasephemeralasthecasualremarks thatthescientistswhobuiltthesedisciplinesexchangedovercoffee.Wherearethe booksandarticlesinwhichthescientistsofthe1950sand1960sarticulatedthe rationalefordevelopingchemicalpesticides,herbicides,andfertilizers?Whereare thecoursesyllabiinwhichinstructorsintheagriculturalsciencesdiscussedalternativeapproachesforunderstandingagriculture’simpactonthebroaderenvironment? Whereistheevidencethatthisgenerationofscientistsdebatedandperhapsrejected
theideasofAlbertHoward?Thefailuretorecordtheconsiderationsanddeliberationsthatledscientiststoundertakethestudiesthatledtotheriseofchemicaland moleculartechnologiesintheplantsciences,andtoamechanicalrevolutioninanimalhusbandry,hasleftthecurrentgenerationvulnerabletothechargethatsuch developmentswereundertakeninsecretbyprofit-andpower-seekingindividuals withlittleregardforfarmers,farmanimals,theenvironment,orthebroaderpublic.
EvenunderassaultfromauthorssuchasRachelCarsonorWendellBerry,the agriculturaldisciplinesofthe1960s,1970s,and1980sdisplayedtoolittlewillingnesstoarticulatethereasonsfor,valuesbehind,andlogicoftheirscience.Ihave arguedthatanimplicitandpoorlyarticulatedutilitarianismwasintegratedintothe rationaleforagriculturalscience.Accordingtothisview,therisingproductivityof industrialagricultureleadstolowerfoodcostsforconsumers(Thompson,1995). Theargumentrunslikethis:Becausefoodisessential,becauseeveryoneeats,and becauseexpendituresforfoodareparticularlycriticalforthepoor,thenetbenefit fromlowerconsumerpricesforfoodoffsetsanycostexperiencedintheformof environmentalimpact,aswellasfarmbankruptciesandassociatedimpactsonrural communitiesthatmayoccurasfarmsbecomelargerandfewer.Althoughafew agriculturaleconomists,notablyLuther Tweeten(1984),haveacceptedtheimportanceofarticulatingtheutilitarianrationaleofthisargumentexplicitly,thisview,if indeeditistheviewofmainstreamagriculturalscientists,remainswhollyimplicit withinthebiologicallyorientedagriculturalsciences.Doesthecurrentgeneration ofscientistsseenoreasontoarticulatetherationalefordoingwhattheydo,to engageinself-reflection,orfordefendingwhattheydoagainstmountingcriticism? Thankfully,theansweris,“Notentirely.”Themovementtoembraceethicshas gonefarthestandmostquicklyintheanimalsciences,beginningnotsurprisingly withentomology.ThecontroversysparkedbyCarson’s SilentSpring in1962did indeedresultinsubstantivedebatewithinthisdiscipline.RobertVanDenBosch offeredabook-lengthethicalcritiqueofhisdisciplinein 1978,andentomologists wereamongthefirstfacultyinagriculturalsciencetopublishinthejournal AgricultureandHumanValues shortlyafteritwaslaunchedin1982.However,itis fairtonotethatthisself-criticismwithinthedisciplineofentomologydidnot embracethevocabularyandconceptualresourcesavailablewithinphilosophical ethicsandthephilosophyofscience.Livestockresearchers,thelastgroupofagriculturalscientistsIwouldhaveexpectedtobreakwithpositivismwhenIbeganmy ownworkonagriculturalethicsin1980,wereinfactthefirsttodoso.Inretrospect,itisnotsurprisingthatthisgroupwouldmovefirstbecausenootherareaof theagriculturalscienceshasbeensubjectedtosuchsustainedcriticismfromso manydifferentdirections.Theleadissue,ofcourse,hasbeenthewelfareoflivestockinconcentratedanimalfeedingoperations,butthefoodanimalindustries havedealtwithenormousissueswithrespecttoenvironment,foodsafety,and changeswithinfarmstructure,aswell(see Thompson,2001).Herethechargehas beenled,perhaps,bymyphilosophicalcolleague,Bernard Rollin(1995),whohad atleasta10-yearheadstartonmeinhisworkonethicalissuesinagriculture.But manyanimalscientistshavetakenupthetaskofarticulating,critiquing,andrefiningthekeynormsfortheirdiscipline.Here,onemustnotepapersbyDavid Fraser xxiiForeword—Firstedition
(1997,1999) andKeith Schillo(1998,1999),alongwithRayStrickland’seffortsto establishastandingbioethicssectionattheannualscientificmeetings.Herealso thereareatleasttwobook-lengthstudiesonethicalissuesbyanimalscientists: PeterCheeke’s ContemporaryIssuesinAnimalAgriculture (1998) andH.O. Kunkel’s HumanIssuesinAnimalAgriculture (2000)
Thingsarenotaswelldevelopedontheplantside.Thereis,ofcourse,Wes Jackson,butWeslongagoforsooktheagriculturaluniversity/experimentstation complextobecomefriendswithWendellBerry,andnoonewouldtakehisideasto representreflectiveself-criticismonthepartofmainstreamcropproductionscience.Fromthemainstream,thefirsthintsofacallforethicsonlynowarebeing heard.Writingforthecentennialissueof TheJournalofAgriculturalScience,L.T. Evanscloseshisreflectionsonthelast100yearsbynotingthat“futureagricultural scientistswillbecalledonnotmerelytoenhanceagriculturalproduction,butalso toconsidermoreexplicitlytheethicalaswellastheenvironmentalconsequences oftheirresearch”(2005,p.10).Maarten ChrispeelsandMandoli(2003) hascoauthoredanarticleentitled“AgriculturalEthics,”andincludedaseriesonthetopicas editorof PlantPhysiology.ButsofarasIknow,thevolumethatyouholdinyour handsisthefirstbook-lengthstudytoincorporatesustainedethicalandphilosophicalreflectionsbyamainstreamagriculturalscientistworkingwithplantsorcrop production,atleastsinceroughlythetimethatLibertyHydeBaileypublished The HolyEarth,in 1915.Zimdahlhasalsogonefartherintothephilosophicalliterature thananyofthescientificallytrainedauthorslistedearlier.Thebookyouarereading nowcontainssophisticatedexpositionsofphilosophicalconceptssuchasutilitarianismandpositivism,anddevelopsacarefulapplicationoftheseconceptstothepracticeofagriculturalscience.
SomewillreadZimdahl’sanalysisandreactinanger.Initself,thatisfine. Therearecertainlydifferentphilosophicalpositionsthatcanbetakenwithrespect tothephilosophyoftheagriculturalsciencesthantheoneZimdahldevelopsinthe followingpages.Whatmusthappennext,however,isthetranslationofthatreactionintowords,thenintoargumentsintendedtoshowjustwhereZimdahlgoes wronginthereader’smind.Thesedebatesneedtobeairedatscientificmeetings, andthereactionstothisbookneedtofindtheirwayintoprint,ifnotinthemajor scientificjournalstheninoutletssuchas AgricultureandHumanvalues or The JournalofAgriculturalandEnvironmentalEthics.Finally,theremustbesignificant portionsofgraduateeducationintheagriculturalsciencesgivenovertothephilosophyofagriculturalscience.Onlythenandbysuchmeanswillthepublicrecordof valuesandrationaleforagriculturalresearchbeconstructedandlaidopentoanyone whocarestolook.WhatismorelikelyisjustwhatZimdahlanticipates.Thosewho disagreewithhisbookwillignoreit,justastheyignoredWendellBerry.Perhaps thiswillarisefromthemistakenandultimatelyself-servingbeliefthattociteand discussliteraturethatonedisagreeswithistolendcredibilitytoitsconclusions;or perhapsitjustisthecontinuinglegacyofpositivismthatpreventsscientistsfrom engaginginthedebatethatsodesperatelyneedstohappen.
Eventhebriefandidiosyncraticlistofworkslistedinthisprefaceshowsthat agriculturewasnotwhollywithoutanyphilosophicalreflectionduringthelasthalf
ofthetwentiethcentury.Thetroubleisthatthisreflectionwasdisjointed,each effortemerging denovo asifnothinghadgonebefore.Here,too,Zimdahl’s approachisanimportantdeparturefromthenorm.Mychallengetothereaderof Zimdahl’sbook,then,istorespondinkind.EvenforthosewhoarelargelysympatheticwiththemainthrustofZimdahl’sargument,thereisaresponsibilitytooffer himthebenefitofengagedcriticism.Itisonlythroughthegiveandtakethatoccurs whenphilosophicalideasarebattedaboutthataliteratureinthephilosophyofagriculturalsciencecanbebuilt.Itisonlybyauthorsbeingwillingtoarticulatethereasonswhytheyseethingsonewayratherthananotherthatwecanhaveapublic recordofthevaluesthatunderlieresearchandtechnologychoicesinagriculture.It isonlythroughsuchapublicrecordthatwecanhavetheabilitytosharpen,refine, andreevaluatethosechoicesfromonegenerationtothenext.Andperhapseven moreimportantly,itisonlythroughsuchapublicrecordthatwecanhaveanyconfidencethatsomethingmorethanthemostself-seekingandvenalmotivesactually areguidingthekeydecisionsthataremadewhenarticlesarepublishedorrejected, scientistsaretenuredordenied,grantsareawarded,andtechnologyisdeveloped. Itisnotinitsemphasisondata,logic,rigor,orevenquantificationthatpositivist philosophyofsciencefails.Allthesevalues,perhapsbetterarticulatedbyPopper thanbyAyer,shouldbecherished.Theerrorcameinestablishingapracticeof silenceamongagriculturalscientistswhenitcomestoarticulating,critiquing,and thendefendingvariousreasonsandrationalesfordoingthingsonewayratherthan another.Thispracticeisirresponsiblebecauseitfailsfuturegenerationsofscientists,whoaredeprivedoftheabilitytosurveythoserationales,examiningtheir strengthsandpossiblyalsofindingplaceswheretheyneedtobeadaptedtochangingcircumstances.Silenceisespeciallyirresponsiblewithinthelandgrantmission ofpublicscience,wherethepublichasareasonableexpectationthatresearch choicesbeconsistentwithabroadconceptionofthepublicinterest.Becausethe publicinterestitselfisanopen-ended,evolving,andrevisableideal,itisdoubly criticalthatscienceintendedtoservethepublicinterestbeengagedinanongoing andpublicprocessofevaluationanddebate.Zimdahlhastakengiantstepsinthe directionofrestoringapracticenoblyevidentinthelegacyofLibertyHydeBailey. LetushopethathiscolleagueswillnotfailtohonorbothZimdahlandBaileywith aconsideredresponse.
PaulB.Thompson
Ayer,A.J.,1936. Language,TruthandLogic.DoverPublications,NewYork.
Bailey,L.H.,1915. TheHolyEarth.CharlesScribner’sandSons,NewYork. Berry,W.,1977. TheeUnsettlingofAmerica:CultureandAgriculture.SierraClubBooks, SanFrancisco,CA.
Borlaug,N.(2000). TheGreenRevolutionRevisitedandtheRoadAhead, http://nobelprize. virtuaJ.museum/peace/articles/borlaug!borlaug-lecture.pdf (accessedJanuary4,2006). Cheeke,P.,1998. ContemporaryIssuesinAnimalAgriculture.InterstatePublishers, Danville,IL.
Chrispeels,M.,Mandoli,D.F.,2003.Agriculturalethics. Plant.Physiol. 132,4 9. Evans,L.T.,2005.Thechangingcontextforagriculturalscience. Agric.Res. 143,7 10. Fraser,1997.Animalwelfarethatreflectsethicalconcerns. Anim.Welf. 6,187 205. Fraser,D.,1999.Animalethicsandanimalwelfarescience:bridgingthetwocultures. Appl. Anim.Behav.Sci. 64,171 189.
Johnson,G.L.,1976.Philosophicfoundations:problems,knowledgeandsolutions. Eur.Rev. Agric.Econ. 3(2/3),207 234.
Johnson,G.L.,1982.Agro-ethics:extension,researchandteaching. South J.Agric.Econ. 1 10.
Kunkel,H.O.,2000. HumanIssuesinAnimalAgriculture.TexasA&MUniversityPress, CollegeStation,TX. Popper,K.,1959. TheLogicofScientificDiscovery.BasicBooks,NewYork. Rollin,B.,1995. FarmAnimalWelfare.IowaStateUniversityPress,Ames,IA.
Schillo,K.,1998.Towardapluralisticanimalscience:posdiberalfeministperspectives. Anim.Sci. 76,2763 2770.
Schillo,K.,1999.Anappropriateroleforethicsinteachingcontemporaryissues. Anim.Sci. 77(Suppl.2),154 162.
Thompson,P.B.,1995. TheSpiritoftheSoil:AgricultureandEnvironmentalEthics RoutledgePublishingCo,NewYork.
Thompson,P.B.,2001.Animalwelfareandlivestockproductioninapostindustrialmilieu. J. Appl.Anim.Welf.Sci. 4(3),191 205.
Thompson,P.B.,2004.Thelegacyofpositivismandtheroleofethicsintheagricultural sciences.In:Scanes,C.G.,Miranowski,J.A.(Eds.), PerspectivesinWorldFoodand Agriculture2004.IowaStateUniversityPress,Ames,IA,pp.335 351.
Tweeten,L.,1984.Foodforpeopleandprofit:ethicsandcapitalism.TheFarmandFood SysteminTransition:EmergingPolicyIssues No.2.CooperativeExtensionService, MichiganStateUniversity,EastLansing,MI.
VanDenBosch,R.,1978. ThePesticideConspiracy.Doubleday,NewYork.
Foreword—Secondedition
Writingaforewordfortherevisedversionofapreviouslypublishedbookwhichis widelyrecognizedasawell-documentedandrespectedsystemicstudyofagricultureandethics,andonewhichalreadyhadastellarandcomprehensiveforeword writtenbyPaulThompsonforthefirstedition,ischallengingtosaytheleast.Since Paulalreadytracedthehistoryandphilosophyofethicsandagricultureinsucha comprehensivemanner,thereiscertainlynopointinaddressingthoseissuesfurther.So,Iwillconcentrateonmakingafewbriefcommentsabouttherevisionsto thisimportantwork,andaddafewobservationsofmyownthatmaybeusefulto thereader.
Thesignificantshiftthateveryoneinterestedinagriculturalsustainability,orfor thatmatterasustainablebiosphere,mustaddress,isthefactthatthefuturewewill allexperienceinthedecadesaheadwillbesignificantlydifferentfromtheworld welivedinforthepastcenturyormore.ZimdahlquotesJane Lubchenco(1998) in thisregard.InherpresidentialaddresstotheAmericanAssociationforthe AdvancementofSciencesheaskedwhetherthescientificcommunitythathadsuccessfullymetpastchallenges“ispreparedfortheequallycrucialanddauntingchallengesthatlieinourimmediatefuture.”Theanswertoherownquestionwas,“No” since“therealchallengesfacingushavenotbeenfullyappreciatednorproperly acknowledgedbythecommunityofscientistswhoseresponsibilityitis,andwill be,tomeetthem.”Lubchencothenwentontosaythatitwastimeforthe“scientificcommunitytotakeresponsibilityforthecontributionsrequiredtoaddressthe environmentalandsocialproblemsbeforeus,problemsthat,withthebestofintentionsintheworld,wehavenonethelesshelpedtocreate.”
TheseinsightsfromLubchencoperhapsbestsumupthereasonwhyZimdahl’s revisededitionissoimportant.Inthisedition,headdressesmanyoftheethicaland moralissues,whichnowimposethemselvesontheagriculturalsciencesaswe attempttoaddressfuturechallenges—issuesrelatedtobiotechnology,organicagriculture,animalagriculture,etc.
Certainlyouragriculturalscientistsareaddressingfuturechallengesfacingagriculture,buttheyhaverarelyaddressedLubchenco’slargerquestion.Mostofus involvedinsustainableagriculture,forexample,stillconcentratemostofourefforts on“tweakingtheedges”ofexistingsystems,assuming,itseems,thattheworld itselfwillremainmuchthesame.Rarelydowecontemplatewhetherornottheproductionmodelsthathavebeensosuccessfulinincreasingtheproductionofagriculturalcommoditiesinthepastcenturycancontinue,orifradicallynewmodelsneed tobedeveloped.AsZimdahlpointsout,thisraisesahostofethicalandmoralquestions.Astandardphrasethatcharacterizesmuchoftoday’sindustrialagriculture
andwhichagriculturalscientistsoftenposeis,“Howarewegoingtofeedninebillionpeople?”Posingthequestionthisway,ofcourse,suggestsamoralimperative andproposesalargelyunquestionedstrategybywhichwemustfulfillourresponsibilities,asagriculturalists,tofuturegenerations.Itassumesthatfeedingagrowing humanpopulationisouronlychallengeandthatwehaveamandatetosimply intensifytheagriculture,whichhasbeensosuccessfuloverthepastcentury—continuetodevelopnewtechnologies,toincreasetheyieldsofafewcommodities,and tocontinue“feedingtheworld.”
Ontheotherhanditmaybethattherealquestionweshouldbeaskingis“how arewegoingtorestoreandmaintainthecapacityforself-renewalofourentire bioticcommunity(Leopold,1949)sothatwehavehealthyecosystemstosustain productivity,and,whatkindoffoodsystemsshouldwedesigntofunctioneffectivelyinsucharesilientecologicalenvironment?”
Inthisregard,anthropologist Schusky(1989) hasraisedsomeinterestingquestionsthatmostagriculturalscientistsarefailingtoaddresstoday.Asananthropologist,Schuskyasksthequestionofsustainabilityfromtheperspectiveofthelong trajectoryofhumanhistory.Howhavewefedourselvessuccessfullyasahuman species?Atfirst,we,ofcourse,fedourselvesashuntergatherers,andheargues thatfromanenergyperspectiveitwasthemostefficientfoodsystemweeverhad sinceitrequiredsolittlelabor.Thenabout10thousandyearsagoweintroduced agriculture.ThefirstperiodofagriculturewastheNeolithicRevolutionandwhile itprovidedmanybenefitsitrequiredmuchmorelaborandprobablyprovideda “lessnutritiousdietthanfoodcollectingandwouldleadtothefirstfamines.”It alsoenabledthebeginningof“apopulationexplosion.”ThenweintroducedasecondperiodofagriculturewhichSchuskycallsthe“neocaloric”period,whichbegan inthemid-twentiethcentury.Hecallsittheneocaloricerabecauseitisentirely basedonoldcalories—fossilenergyandalloftheotherold,stored,concentrated caloriesthatmademodern,industrialagriculturepossible.Schuskygoesontoargue thatthisNeocaloricerawillofnecessitybeaveryshortperiodinthetime-lineof humanhistorysincewearerapidlyusingupalltheseoldcalories—fossilfuels,fossilwater,rockphosphate,potassium,richdepositsoftopsoil,etc.Andoncethese oldcaloriesaregonetheneocaloriceramustend.So,thequestionfacingusnowis, whatkindoffoodsystemwillwedesignforthenexteraoffeedingourselvesasa humanspecies?Consequently,akeymoralquestionfacingusasaspeciesishow arewegoingtomaintainthecapacitytofeedthehumanpopulationinthelightof thesefuturechallenges?Withoutthe“oldcalories”thatservedasourprimarynaturalresourcefortheneocaloricera,whatnewdesignscanweimagine?
Fortunatelywehaveanemerginggroupofscientiststhatareexploringsomeof theoptions.Forexample,WesJacksonandthescientistsattheLandInstituteare demonstratingthatwecanreplaceannualcropplantswithperennialsthataremuch moreenergyefficient,requirelessirrigationandfertilizers,sequestermorecarbon, requirelesslabor,andprovidemanyotherservicesthatbegintoaddresssomeof thechallengesinournewfuture. Perfectoetal.(2010) imaginearadicallydifferent landscapeforouragricultureofthefuture,onebasedmoreonagroecologicalmodelsthatusethescienceofadaptivecyclestodesignsocial,economicaswellasecologicalresilienceintoouragriculturefuture.Resiliencethinkers,whoaretakingthe
lessonslearnedfromthescienceofecology,determinehowlandscapesandcommunitiescanbedesignedtoabsorbsomeofthedisturbanceswearelikelytoencounter aswemoveintothepostneocaloricera,andstillmaintainessentialfunctions.They suggesthowsomeofthoseinsightsmayapplytoagriculture(WalkerandSalt, 2006).
Ofcourse,oncewebegintoaddresstheselargerdesignissueswewillhaveto askfarmorequestionsthanthesimplistic“Howarewegoingtofeedninebillion people?”Wewillneedtobeginasking“whatistheappropriatenumberofhuman specieswithinthecontextofthelargerbioticcommunitytoachievesustainability”? Leopold,amongothers,hasremindedusthatthehealthoftheentirebioticcommunityisessentialtoourownsurvival,andsuggestedhowwemightmaintainsucha healthy“bioticpyramid”(1949).Wewillalsohavetoaskhowwecanredesigna foodsystemthatwastesalotlessfood.Asmanyfoodsystemanalystshavepointed outwearealreadyproducingenoughfoodtofeed9billionpeople,theproblemis thatwearewastingnearlyhalfofit.Andthereisnocompellingevidencetosuggestthatwecanmaintainthecurrentsystem.
Consequently,asZimdahlpointsoutwehavetobeginaddressingadditional,far morecomplexquestionsthantheonesouragriculturalscientistshavegrownused to.Weneedtobeginaddressingalloftheinterrelatedchallengesthatareonour door-step,andbegindevotingmuchmoreofourincrediblebrainpowertoresearch andeducationthatbeginstocomeupwithmuchmorecomplexandnuanced answers(answersthattakedeepethicalandmoralproblemsintoconsideration) thantheisolated“science-based”strategiesthathaveoccupiedmostofourscientistsinrecentdecades.Inthisregard,theholisticmannerinwhich Cribb(2010),a sciencewriterfromAustralia,addressesourfuturechallenges,providesanicecomplementtothechallengingquestionsZimdahlposesforusinhisneweditionof Agriculture’sEthicalHorizon.
FrederickKirschenmann
TheLeopoldInstitute,IowaStateUniversity,Ames,IA,UnitedStates
References
Cribb,J.,2010. TheComingFamine:TheGlobalFoodCrisisandWhatWeCandotoAvoid It.UniversityofCaliforniaPress,Berkeley,CA. Leopold,A.,1949. ASandCountyAlmanac.OxfordUniversityPress,NewYork. Lubchenco,J.,1998.Enteringthecenturyoftheenvironment:anewcontractforscience. Science 279,491 497. Perfecto,I.,Vandermeer,J.,Wright,A.,2010. Nature’sMatrix:LinkingAgriculture, ConservationandFoodSovereignty.Earthscan,Washington,DC. Schusky,E.L.,1989. CultureandAgriculture:AnEcologicalIntroductiontoTraditionaland ModernFarmingSystems.BerginandGarveyPublishers,NewYork. Walker,B.,Salt,D.,2006. ResilienceThinking.IslandPress,Washington,DC.
Foreword—Thirdedition
Therearelotsofthingswecanlivewithout.Whenyoureturnfromabackpacking trip,youdiscoverthatyouneverusedtherazorbladesorthecurlingiron,orthe electricfryingpan.Whatwasessentialincludedcomfortablehikingboots,clean socks,agoodtopographymapofthearea,awell-fittedbackpack,andasafe,secure sourceoffoodandwater.Ifabearraidsyourcampandyouareafewdaysout from“civilization,”youwillhaveabetterappreciationaboutwhatsafeandsecure mean.
Wedon’tneedawildernessexperiencetoknowthatfoodisvitaltolife.The averageUSadultconsumes3700calories/day,whereas,intheDemocratic RepublicofCongo,theconsumptionaverages1600/day(EvOK.ie/health2014 MAILONLINEM.Peppers,2014).Theannualworldfoodproductionin2021is expectedtofeed7.7+billionpeopleoftheworldatabout2600caloriesperday. Basedonthesevalues,thefoodproductionlevelof2021shouldfeedover10+billion.In2050,however,theaveragedailycaloricintakeof9+billioninhabitantsof theworldisestimatedtobe3050kcalperperson(orglobally4.8trillioncalories perday)duetogreateraveragewealth(FAO,nd).Butwhileenoughfoodisproducedfortoday’spopulation,about11%ofthe2021globalpopulationaremoderatelytoseverelyunderweight,livingwithfoodinsecurityandlimitedaccessto food,andinthefuture,thistooisexpectedtoworsen.Thereasonsforfoodinsecurityaremultifoldwhichincludefoodwaste,poverty,poorinfrastructure,littleorno investmentinacountry’sagriculturalenterprise,environmentalconstraints,and poordistributionsystems(FoodAidFoundation,2020 https://www.foodaidfoundation.org/world-hunger-statistics.html).Isthereamoralobligationtofeedthosewho areunabletogrowtheirownfoodduetoenvironmentalconstraints;orthosewho donothaveaccesstofoodduetopoordistribution;orwhoarelivingindirepovertyandcannotpurchasesuppliesorfood?Andifthereisanobligation,which entity(ies)shouldundertaketheseresponsibilities?
Agricultureisthescienceofgrowingcropsandrearinganimalsforfood/feed/ fiber.Oneofthemaingoalsasanagronomististoencouragemostoftheworld’s populationtolearnthefactthatfoodproductionistheworld’sonlyessentialindustry.Indevelopedcountries,theagriculturesystemisefficientandcomposedof manylayersthatincludesfarmers,truckdrivers,warehouses,processingcompanies, andsupermarkets.IntheUnitedStates,onlyabout1%(1.7millionpeople)ofthe populationareemployedinthefoodandbeverageindustry(USDA-ERS,2021). This1%producecommoditiestofeedtheUSpopulationandexporttoothercountries.Theremaining99%ofAmericansaregenerallydisconnectedfromagriculturalproductionanddon’tunderstandwhoproducesthefood;theconditionsunder
whichitisgrown;theresourcesrequired;thehardworkneeded;northeknowledge, skills,andabilitiesofthosewhoproduceit.
Globallyabout2billionpeople(25%ofthepopulation)areclassifiedassubsistencefarmers.These500millionhouseholdsareestimatedtobeworkingon2ha(5 acres)ofland,withthefamily’slivelihooddependentonmakingsuretheircrops grow.Theyrelymainlyonseasonalproduceforsustenance.
Subsistencefarmersunderstandanddependontheirhardworkandskillsand abilitiesneededtoproduceacrop,astheirlifeandlivelihooddependonthelabor thatmostofustakeforgranted.Mostdobackbreakinghandlabor.Somemechanizedpiecesofequipmentmaybeavailablewhichmaybesharedamongcommunitymembers.InVietnam,Isawwomeninthefieldshandharvestingwithrice knivesandcarryingthesheavestoacommunityricesheller,walkingtoacommunitywellandcarrying10galofwateratatimeonashoulderyoketoirrigatesmall plots,andhandtransplantingriceshootsintopaddies.Whilethereweresomesmall tillersandtractorsandanimalsused,handlaborwasthenorm,nottheexception.In theUnitedStates,cornplanterscanrangefrom6to36rowsandplant7to45acres perhour.Thistechnologyiscertainlynotaimedatsubsistencefarmersbutsomeof thetechniquesmaybeapplicable.Which,ifany,agriculturalpracticesshouldbe providedtosubsistencefarmers?Ordotraditionalsystemsbetterservetheirneeds?
Thehigh-yieldingvarietiesdevelopedduringtheGreenRevolutionwerebased onfertilizerandpesticideinputs,aswellasbettermanagement.ThecostofplantingandmaintainingaUScorncrop[herbicides,fertilizers,geneticallymodified (GM)crops,orimprovedvarietieswithoutmodification]averaged$250/acrein 2016.Thisistooexpensiveforsubsistencefarmers.Shouldseed,fertilizers,and cropprotectionproductsbemadeavailableatlittleornocost?Ifso,whoshould payfortheproductsandwhoshouldmonitorproductusetomakesuretheyare usedcorrectly?Isfoodandfoodproductionacommongoodfortheworldora commercialenterprisewiththosethatcannotafforditleftbehind?Whilemanagementcanbetaught(ifeducationandextensionresourcesaremadeavailable),will theneededsuppliestoenhanceyieldsstillbelacking?
Nomatterthesizeoftheenterprise,agriculturerequiresandhasafirmscientific foundationbasedonquantitativeresearch.Thoseinvolvedincropproductionhave fairlyadequateassessmentsaboutactionsneededtoproduceacrop,suchastimeof planting,howmanyseedstoplantperacre,andhowmuchfertilizertoapply.We canestimatehowmuchfeedandwhatvaccinesareneededtomaintainanimals’ herdhealth.
However,agriculturealsoneeds,buthasyetnotdeveloped,astrongethical foundationaboutwhatweoughttodotomaintainorimproveagriculturewithout degradingenvironmentalresources.Bt-GMcropsallowtheproteinsfrom Bacillus thuringiensis tobeexpressedinplanttissuestokillspecificinsects.Thistechnology limitstheneedforinsecticideapplication.Butisitalsoselectingforresistantbiotypesthatmaybehardertocontrol?Orreducingthebeneficialpollinatorpopulation?IntheUSSouthwest,ittakesabout6-acrefeetofwaterperyeartomaintain analfalfacrop,almostallfromirrigation.IntheUSMidwest,aboutthesameyield canbeobtainedunderrainfedconditions.ShouldtheSouthwestbegrowingalfalfa?
Orshouldthewaterbeusedforotherpurposes?Somemightsimplysaydon’tgrow alfalfaintheSouthwest.However,howwillcattleanddairycowsbefed?Hasconsiderationbeengiventoalltheneededinputsformaintainingherdsinthenorthern tierofstates,especiallywhentemperaturescandipto 30 C( 30 F)orbelow,in thewinter?Also,wasthetime,effort,andfossilfuelrequirementoftransporting alfalfafromfarawayplaces,wherelesswaterisused,beingconsidered?Orshould milkandmilkproductsbeimportedfromforeigncountries?Ifso,howwouldthis impactUSfoodsecurity?Thesetypesofissuesandtrade-offsaredifficultto reconcile.
Futureeventsmayalterthecourseofagriculturalintensification.Climatechange willdisruptcropproductionandanimalhusbandry.Extremeweatherevents,such asseveredroughts,recordfloods,andhigh-intensitystorms,areanticipated,which mayresultinpoorsoilhealth,soilsalinization,poorcropgrowth,orcrop/herd destruction.Forexample,anabnormalsnowstorminOctober,2013resultedinthe deathofover100,000cattleinwesternSouthDakota.Duetourbanization,landis being“citified”withhomes,stripmalls,andsoon,andtheseareascannotbeconvertedbacktoproductiveagriculturalland.Astheselandsareremovedfromagriculture,intensificationoftheremainingareasneedstooccurtobalancethese losses.Aquifersareshrinkingduetohighuserates,andreservoirsarefillingwith siltwhichleadstolesswaterstorage.Theseeventsareoccurringatatimewhen warmertemperaturesaredrivingmorewaterusetoproducecropsonirrigatedareas andsustainhealthyanimals.Thedepletionoffossilfuels(coal,oil,andnatural gas),whichareallnonrenewable,willchallengetheagriculturalenterprisefurther astheyarerelieduponforthemanufacturingoffertilizersandcropandanimalprotectionproducts,aswellasday-to-dayfarminputs,processing,transportation,and distributionactivities.Willfuturesocietynormsbeunrestandriotsovershrinking food,energy,andwaterresources?
Canagriculturalproductionmeetandovercomethesefuturechallenges?Ifso, how?Whataretheconsequencesofintensifyingagricultureontheenvironment, biodiversity,andhumanhealth?Howcanfarmers,ranchers,andagriculturalscientistsmeetfoodproductionchallengesinawaythatpreservestheenvironmentand sustainslifeforfuturegenerations?Thesearealldifficult,legitimatequestions. Whilesomeoutsideofagriculturehavebeguntodiscusstheseissues,thesequestionsandconcernsarenotregularlyaddressednordebatedwithintheagricultural community.
Someindustrieshavebeenexaminingproductsustainabilityandenvironmental impactsbyconductingalifecycleanalysis(LCA),whichcomparesandevaluates howdifferentmanagementorproductionpracticesforapieceofequipment,product,orserviceinfluencesthecarbonfootprintandenergyuseoftheproductfrom “cradletograve”.Agricultureisjustbeginningtoevaluateprocessesinthismanner (Sieverdingetal.,2016and2020).However,most,ifnotall,LCAmodelstodate havebeendevelopedbycivilengineers,whooftendonotunderstandtheagriculturalsystem.Thereforepeoplewithagriculturalexpertiseneedtobeinvolvedto provideaccuratedataandinputs.Otherwise,LCAwillbevaluelessandcouldgeneratepoordecisions(“garbagein,garbageout”scenario).
WhileLCAanalysisprovidesamorequantitativeestimateoftheenvironmental impact(notablycarbonfootprint)ofdifferentprocesses,itstilldoesnotprovidea moralfoundationforagriculturalpracticestoassureasufficientfuturefoodsupply. Thisstillneedsinformedpublicdebate.Everyonehastoeat.Foodproductionbenefitseveryone,buttherearewidelydifferingopinionsaboutwhatisgoodorbadand rightorwrongaboutagriculture.Theproblemisthatallinvolvedneedtostartwith acommonsetoftruthsandreliableinformationtobeginthediscussion,ratherthan misconceptions,inaccuracies,andincorrectpreconceivednotions.BecausefewpeoplearedirectlyinvolvedinagriculturalproductionintheUnitedStates,thisisnot aneasyobstacletobeovercome.
Criticaldebatesaboutthemoralsandethicsofagriculturalpracticesareoften ignoredbyfarmers,ranchers,andagriculturalscientists,whopointthefactthat foodproductioninandofitselfismorallyjustifiedand,therefore,nofurtherreflectiononthetopicisneeded.Whenfoodisscarce,themajorpurposeistoproduce morebecauseitisbelievedthatincreasingproductionwillachievethemorallycorrectgoaloffeedingall.However,thisfocusremainsonwhatwecando,noton whatweshoulddo.Itiscriticalandlongoverduetoexamineagriculture’smoral foundationanditsunderlyingnorms.Noteveryonewillbesatisfiedwiththeoutcome(s),infact,theremaybeawidevarietyofoutcomes,butpublicdebateand discussionsaboutwhat,where,andhowfoodisproducedwillimprovethepublic imageofagriculture.Ifweonlythinkaboutagriculture’spositiveaccomplishments andignoreordisregardthenegativeconsequences,we,asagricultural“elite”,can createdistrustandsuspicionaboutagriculturalpractices,goals,andthesafetyand securityoftheentirefoodsupplychainamongpeoplenotinvolvedinthefood industry.
IamaweedscientistandliveinSouthDakota,whereagricultureisthenumber oneindustryand,thediscussionsaboutagricultureandagriculturalenterprisescan becontentious.Forexample,ananimalproductionfacilityappliedforaconcentratedanimalfeedingoperation(CAFO)permit.ACAFOhasinvolvementofthe EnvironmentalProtectionAgencyandtherearemanyregulationsthatmustbefollowedincludingthenumberofanimalshoused,sizeofbarns,waterprotection,pollutiondischarge,andanutrientmanagementplanforthemanuremustbe developed.Othersinthecommunityopposegrantingthepermitbecausethiswill bringin“industrialfarming”totheareaandtheoperationwillbeanenvironmental hazard.Now,iftheproducerhasonelessanimalunitperyear,aCAFOwouldnot beneededandtherewouldbealotfewerregulationstofollow,especiallyforenvironmentalprotection.IwouldratherhaveaCAFOputinplacethanafeedingoperationthathas,fewif,anyregulationstofollow.
Icannotspeakforall,butasanagriculturalresearchscientistexaminingproductionquestions,Ithinkinalimitedethicalframework.Iwillask,can(x,y,z)be done?Theresearchresultsmayshowayieldincreaseor,perhaps,adecreasein laborrequirements.Increasedyieldordecreasedlaborcostsmayspecificallybenefitsomebutadverselyimpactothers.Forexample,iflaborisdecreased,willitput someoneoutofajob,especiallyinsmallruralcommunities?Whatdoesthismean fortheruralschool,health-carefacility,andgrocerystore?Orconversely,willit xiiForeword—Thirdedition
allowtimeandefforttogointootherprojects?Willincreasedproductionactually lowercommodityprices(glutthemarket)orincreasefoodsupplyandprovidemore incomeforfarmers?Althoughthesetypesofimpactshavelargersocietalconsequences,theyarerarelydiscussed.
Ialsohavebeeninvolvedinenvironmentalquestions,workingwithherbicide/ crop/soilinteractions.Ioftencontemplate,whataretheunintendednegativeand positiveconsequencesofmyresearchinthenear-andlong-term?Positiveresults areexpected(betterimmediateweedcontrol),whereasunexpectednegativeeffects maynotbeimmediatelyobviousormeasurable.Forexample,weedmanagement withherbicidescanbeperceivedasabestpracticeoranunacceptablepractice. Herbicideapplicationscontrolcompetitiveweedsandhavehelpedtoincreasenotillageacresandfarmsize.Ascultivationisreduced,soilerosionisalsoreduced (positiveoutcome).AnonappreciatedimpactofRoundupReadycropsisthelimiteduseofothermoreenvironmentallyharmfulherbicides.Suchherbicideswere showntoleachtogroundwateraquifers,carryovertothenextcroppingcycle, reducelandscapebiodiversity,aswellashavethepotentialforcausingnegative humanhealthimpacts.However,negativeimpactsofusingsinglemethodforweed controlhaveemerged.Herbicide-resistantweedshavebeenselectedbyrepeated herbicideapplication,which,atfirst,wereignored.Inthe1960slessthan10weed specieswererecognizedasherbicideresistant.In2021theInternationalHerbicideResistantWeedDatabase(www.weedscience.org)reports522uniquecases(species Xsiteofaction)ofherbicide-resistantweedsgloballywith263speciesidentifiedin 94cropsin71countries.Theproblemofweedresistancehasbecomeamajoragriculturalissuethatmustbeaddressedtomaintaincropyields.Robotics,thereturnof tillage,andothermanagementtechniquesareproposed.Solutionsshouldconsider agriculturalandnonagriculturalinput.
Clearly,herbicideshelpedwithweedcontrolincroppingsystemsandincreased yields.However,herbicideusehasbecomeapolarizingsocietalissue.Consumers donotask,whatwouldbethepriceof(x,y,z)ifweedsreducedyieldsby30%or more,orifmorelaborwereneededtokeepfieldsfreeofweeds.Forexample, Fennimore(personalcommunication)didastudyusinghandlabortocontrolweeds. Heestimatedthatiftheweeddensitywas100weeds/m 2 (notatypical),itwould take100person-hoursperhectaretohandweed.Incontrast,atypicalherbicide applicationwouldtakeabout4min.Peoplewhofindthetimetomanageweedsin theirownsmallgardensknowitishard,time-consumingwork.Mostwouldrefuse toworkinanagriculturalfield.Ruralpopulationsarenotlargeandfarmersdonot havethemoneytopayforhandweeding.Inaddition,tomakeendsmeet,commoditypricesforeveryonewouldbeveryhighorfarmerswouldbegoingoutofbusiness.Weedmanagementishardwork,butherbicideshavemadeiteasier.Thereare negativeeffects,andtheseshouldberecognizedanddiscussedinpublicforumsso thatthereisabetterunderstandingoftheissuesandbalancedapproachescanbe developed.
Agriculture’sEthicalHorizonsisnowinitsthirdedition.Clearly,thereisan audiencetoexamineagriculturalethicsintheplantandanimalsciences.Inthefirst edition(2006),Zimdahldescribedutilitarianism(thebeliefthatactionsarerightif
