Controlling Biodiversity? Ethical analysis of the case of swine fever and wild boar in Denmark
C. Gamborg & P. Sandøe (2006)
Ethics and the politics of food. Wageningen.
Abstract
Biodiversity has high priority these days – not many would argue against a concern for it. However, the implications of the priority depend on the level of nature we are addressing. Big mammals are absent from Danish nature. They have been here before, so why not reintroduce them or allow for natural migration to promote biodiversity and wildness? But a “richer” nature is not the only value at stake. Denmark is also the world’s largest exporter of pork. Wild boars could act as a vector for classical swine fever (CSF) infections in conventionally farmed pigs. This looks like a classic conflict between considerable economic interests and profound conservation concerns.
To get to a full understanding of the issues, and to open a more comprehensive discussion, we need to address the embedded ethical issues. What degree of control are we ready to exert, and how do we really value nature? The paper argues that besides the distinction and potential conflict between nature as a value and the common good, there is also an interesting distinction to be made between “micro-nature” (including the virus that cause classical swine fever) and “macro-nature” (medium sized flora and fauna). Predominantly, micro-nature is something we want to control, whereas we want macro-nature to be let loose. This dichotomy of nature has to be addressed.
Controlling Biodiversity? Ethical analysis of the case of swine fever and wild boar in Denmark (pdf)