Looking for Moral Responsibility in Ownership: A Way to Deal with Hazards of GMOs

Zoë Robaey

doi:10.1007/s10806-014-9517-8

Abstract

Until now, the debates around genetically modified seeds in agriculture have converged towards two main issues. The first is about hazards that this new technology brings about, and the second is about the ownership of seeds and the distribution of their economic benefits. In this paper, I explore an underdeveloped topic by linking these two issues: how ownership shapes the distribution of moral responsibility for the potential hazards of genetically modified seeds. Indeed, while ownership is debated in terms of economic rights and hazards in terms of “good” or “bad” science, no one has looked at whether or not we could and should ascribe and distribute moral responsibility for hazards based on ownership of genetically modified seeds. I argue that we should. Using the notion of ownership as a bundle of rights, I argue that from a moral perspective, the genetically modified seed has several owners at the same time. Although different owners may not have the same economic rights over the seed, they all have a moral responsibility, possibly to varying degrees, for the potential hazards brought about by the seed. Secondly, I argue that, as long as a seed carries the character trait that was intentionally modified, then it calls for moral responsibility. All in all, I formulate a way for linking issues of ownership and hazards of genetically modified seeds in agriculture through the concept of moral responsibility.

Highlights

Until now, the debates around genetically modified seeds in agriculture have converged towards two main issues
The discussion about genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has been revolving around issues of risks and issues of ownership. The only way these two issues have been linked in law and policy are through the concept of liability for damages, i.e. people planting GMOs can be held liable for damages to organic farmers harvest in the European Union (EU)
Property is a construct that allows the realization of ethical goals, and the ontological one questions whether or not something can be owned. While both of these approaches are relevant to discussing the link between ownership and moral responsibility, this paper focuses on the instrumental approaches of ownership because genetically seeds are currently owned

Summary

Introduction

The debates around genetically modified seeds in agriculture have converged towards two main issues. Van de Poel and Nihlen Fahlquist (2013) argue that the relation between risk and moral responsibility has been surprisingly understudied An interesting observation they make with regards to forward-looking moral responsibility is that it is often linked to decisions and control, i.e. in the case of GMOs, the decisions of several actors to produce and use genetically modified seeds. I focus on the value of fairness, i.e. why it is justified to ascribe owners of genetically modified seeds forward-looking moral responsibility This is especially relevant in the case of genetically modified seeds where (1) there are several owners of the seed at the same time and (2) there are many uncertainties and ignorance linked to the use of genetically modified seeds. I choose to speak of hazards, which include risks, uncertainties and ignorance

Objectives

Conclusion