Skip to main content

Towards a Narrative of Sustainability, Genetic Engineering, Responsibility and Technological Pragmatism

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Food, Genetic Engineering and Philosophy of Technology
  • 401 Accesses

Abstract

The guiding thesis for this book is that out of the narrative crisis created by the conflicting optimistic and pessimistic philosophies of technology, a new narrative of sustainability is emerging. In this final chapter I argue that the recent development of planetary boundary theory marks a major advance in fulfilling the duty of comparative futurology, and that it provides a context for evaluating genetic engineering in agriculture. In very broad terms, these three elements, an ethics of responsibility, planetary boundary theory, and a pragmatic philosophy of technology, can make significant contributions in building a narrative of sustainability. The chapter concludes by placing advances in agricultural biotechnology within the context of a precautionary ethics and comparative futurology, as exemplified by planetary boundary theory. Given that the earth’s population is predicted to grow to more than 10 billion people over the next century while global environmental problems like climate change intensify, it seems difficult to imagine we can fulfill our duties to future generations without innovations like genetic engineering in agriculture. However, if emerging technologies are going to help create a more just and sustainable future, we must move beyond the conflict between the progressive and pessimistic narratives and continued to construct a narrative of sustainability.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 89.99
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

Notes

  1. 1.

    As was pointed out earlier, one interpretation of the PP is as a principle of applied ethics that morally requires shifting the burden of proof from those who wish to protect human health and the environment to prove that an activity or technology is dangerous, to those who wish to promote an activity or technology to show that it is safe. However, in their analysis of the PP, van den Belt and Gremmen conclude that, on closer examination, “ethical consideration of a more specific character may enter into the balancing of risks and benefits and tilt the outcome one direction or the other” (van den Belt and Gremmen 2002). In other words, in some situations and contexts the application of the PP to shift the burden of proof to those who are promoting an activity may be appropriate, all things considered. However, in other contexts and situations the burden should shift to those who oppose an activity—again, when and how to apply the PP requires good judgment or practical wisdom.

    Andrew Sterling seems to recognize this in his analysis of the PP. He concludes his analysis by saying that “the main contributions of [precautionary] approaches are to encourage more robust methods in appraisal, make value judgments more explicit, and enhance qualities of deliberation” (Sterling 2016, 17). The point to draw from these various comments is that the application of the PP requires a rich context that includes different kinds of knowledge—scientific, ethical, social, political, and so on—combined with good judgment, political prudence or practical wisdom. Sweeping applications of the PP to shift the burden of proof to the developers of GE organisms in all cases fails to appreciate the role GE might play in the larger task of needing to rapidly transform agricultural practices and keep humanity within safe operating boundaries of the planet.

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Scott, N.D. (2018). Towards a Narrative of Sustainability, Genetic Engineering, Responsibility and Technological Pragmatism. In: Food, Genetic Engineering and Philosophy of Technology. The International Library of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Ethics, vol 28. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96027-2_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics