Abstract

Food production, water management, land use, and animal and public health are all topics of extensive public debate. These themes are linked to the core activities of the agricultural sector, and more specifically to the work of farmers. Nonetheless, the ethical discussions are mostly initiated by interest groups in society rather than by farmers. At least in Europe, consumer organizations and animal welfare and environmental organizations are more present in the public debate than farmers. This is not how it should be. First, because consumers often cannot but rely on agriculture. Second, because recent research shows that farmers have moral beliefs and convictions that appear to be broader than economic considerations and that are—to a certain extent—specific to their profession. This raises the question how to make input from farmers operational in the public debates on the future of farming. We discuss one option: entrusting farmers with professional autonomy concerning moral matters related to farming. We sketch the historical background of the current situation in which farmers are relatively silent on moral matters and we present some clear indications that farmers have values and moral beliefs that are relevant for the public debate. Next the concepts of professionalism and professional autonomy are discussed and applied to the practice of farming. Finally, we discuss the relevance and limits of professional moral autonomy for the agricultural profession. We close with an overview of what this moral autonomy implies for and requires from farmers in practice. We conclude that if some preconditions are met by farmers, then this type of moral autonomy can be relevant for farmers and for society, and contributes to the quality of the public debate on the future of farming.

Highlights

  • Food production, water management, land use, and animal and public health are all topics of extensive public debate

  • We sketch the historical background of the current situation in which farmers are relatively silent on moral matters and we present some clear indications that farmers have values and moral beliefs that are relevant for the public debate

  • We see clear indications that farmers have moral beliefs and values that enable them to contribute to the public debate in a relevant way

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Water management, land use, and animal and public health are all topics of extensive public debate. Since publications such as Ruth Harrison’s Animal Machines (1964) and the subsequent studies on animal welfare, such as the well-known report by the Brambell committee (1965), animal welfare has become a subject of public debate In this debate farmers tended to focus on the technical, rather than on the ethical side of the matter (e.g., Te Velde et al 2002; Fraser et al 1997). In many European societies other stakeholders started to reflect on what is ‘‘right’’ with respect to animal welfare These groups do not deny the role of farmers with regard to animal welfare, but they do not consider them to be competent partners in the ethical debate on animal welfare.

Objectives
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call