Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-5b777bbd6c-w6wnr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-25T19:54:34.961Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - The food we eat: the right to be informed and the duty to inform

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2014

By
Michiel Korthals
Edited by
Ruth Chadwick ,
Mairi Levitt  and
Darren Shickle
Michiel Korthals
Affiliation:
Wageningen University
Mairi Levitt
Affiliation:
Lancaster University
Darren Shickle
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
Get access

Summary

Introduction: the evolving gap between food production and consumption as the context of the desire to know

One of the most salient features of human evolution is the continuing reduction of time needed to produce, prepare and digest food (Wrangham 2009). This evolution reveals simultaneously one of the main ethical paradoxes of food: humans have become what they are now due to the continuing reduction of food processing time (time-saving cooking mechanisms), and this enables them to be severed from food (production), to forget about food (production), even to degrade food (production). The evolutionary advantages in the reduction of food collecting, producing and digesting time create also the risk that people become both alienated from food and subordinated to the corporate production of food. In the end, many people no longer know what to buy and what to eat – but of course they must eat. They know how to unpack a prepared box or how to put its content in the microwave, but no more. This gap between consumption and production and the complexity of food production make the sector a very inaccessible one; each food item is processed and traded many times before it lands on the shelf and even producers at the beginning of these processes do not know what happens later. Alienation is the core word here; it derives from the gap between food production and food consumption. However, nowadays many consumers feel alienated and lose trust in the food sector (Berg 2011); some want to go back to the earlier situation of food self-sufficiency (Pollan 2006); others want to find relevant knowledge, discuss new ways of food preparation and food production, and even become involved in new types of production (Stolle and Micheletti 2013). Indeed, it is not very fruitful to overcome this disconnection by returning to the ways of food production of two hundred years ago: new technologies have developed, new types of relationships between farmers, processors and consumers have emerged, and the role of food in our social life has changed (to name just a few factors).

Type
Chapter
Information
The Right to Know and the Right Not to Know
Genetic Privacy and Responsibility
 , pp. 196 - 208
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allen, W. 2012. The Good Food Revolution: Growing healthy food, people, and communities. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Baier, A. 1994. Moral Prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bartley, T. 2011. ‘Certification as a mode of social regulation’, in Levi-Faur, D. (ed.) Handbook of the Politics of Regulation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 441–51.Google Scholar
Berg, L. 2011. ‘Trust in food in the age of mad cow disease: A comparative study of consumers’ evaluation of food safety in Belgium, Britain and Norway’, Appetite 42(1): 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouwman, L., Te Molder, H., Koelen, M. and Van Woerkum, C. 2009. ‘I eat healthfully but I am not a freak. Consumers’ everyday life perspective on healthful eating’, Appetite 53(3): 390–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowen, D. J., Tomoyasu, N., Anderson, M., Carney, M. and Kristal, A. 1992. ‘Effects of expectancies and personalized feedback on fat consumption, taste, and preference’, Journal of Applied Social Psychology 22: 1061–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busch, L. 2011. Standards: Recipes for reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
California Proposition 37 2012. ‘Mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food’. Available at: (accessed 3 December 2013).
Chandon, P. 2012. ‘How package design and packaged-based marketing claims lead to overeating’, Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 35: 7–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coff, C., Barling, D., Korthals, M. and Nielsen, T. 2008. Ethical Traceability and Communicating Food. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elster, J. 1987. The Cement of Society. A study of social order. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eurobarometer 2006. Risk Issues. A report to the EC Directorate General for Research from the project ‘Life Sciences in European Society’ QLG7-CT-1999-00286. Available at: (accessed 9 April 2014).
Eurobarometer Special 389 2012. Europeans’ Attitudes towards Food Security, Food Quality and the Countryside. European Commission. Available at: (accessed 9 April 2014).
Fukuyama, F. 1996. Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. NewYork: Touchstone Books.Google Scholar
Jenkins, D., Sievenpiper, J., Pauly, D., Sumaila, U. R., Kendall, C. and Mowat, F. 2009. ‘Are dietary recommendations for the use of fish oils sustainable?’Canadian Medical Association Journal 180(6): 633–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. 1995. Was heisst Aufklärung, idem. Darmstadt: Werke.Google Scholar
Kaplan, D. (ed.) 2011. The Philosophy of Food. Berkeley, CA: California University Press.
Keulartz, J., Korthals, M., Schermer, M. and Swierstra, T. 2002. ‘Ethics in a technological culture. A programmatic proposal for a pragmatist approach’, Science, Technology and Human Values 29(1): 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korthals, M. 2004. ‘Before dinner: Philosophy and ethics of food’, Dordrecht: Springer.
Luetchford, P. and Carrier, J. G. (eds.) 2012. Ethical Consumption: Social value and economic practice. Oxford: Berghahn Books.
Luhman, N. 1982. Trust and Power. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Mick, D. G., Broniarczyk, S. M. and Haidt, J. 2004. ‘Choose, choose, choose, choose, choose, choose, choose: Emerging and prospective research on the deleterious effects of living in consumer hyperchoice’, Journal of Business Ethics 52(2): 207–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1975. ‘On Liberty’, in Mill, J. S.Three Essays. Oxford University Press, p. 18.Google Scholar
Nowotny, H., Scott, P. and Gibbons, M. 2001. Rethinking Science: Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
O’Neill, O. 2002. A Question of Trust. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pollan, M. 2006. The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A natural history of four meals. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Putnam, R. 2000. Bowling Alone. The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon.Google Scholar
Reisch, L. 2004. ‘Principles and visions of a new consumer policy’, Journal of Consumer Policy 27: 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, P. 2008. The End of Food. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Stolle, D. and Micheletti, M. 2013. Political Consumerism: Global responsibility in action. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wansink, B. and Chandon, P. 2006. ‘Can “low-fat” nutrition labels lead to obesity?’Journal of Marketing Research 43: 605–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wrangham, R. 2009. Catching Fire. How cooking made us human. London: Profile.Google Scholar
Compassion in World Farming
Environmental Working Group
European Society for Agricultural and Food Ethics
The Fair Food Network
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Food crisis and the global land grab
Food Ethics Council
Grain
Grist. A beacon in the smog.
Natural Resources Defense Council
People are starving, but there’s enough food. Co-exist. Morgan Clendaniel (ed.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×