Skip to main content
Log in

Technology as Responsibility: Failure, Food Animals, and Lab-grown Meat

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As we become more aware of the various problems associated with technologically mediated meat production (e.g., the lives of the animals, the human health effects of consuming meat, the ecological impacts of large-scale animal farming), we also confront a variety of technologically mediated potential fixes (e.g., in vitro meat technologies). Rather than comparing bad and good technologies in the context of meat, I want instead to explore the dynamics of the human-animal relationships expressed within specific approaches. This method, I suggest, illustrates the technological aspects of the relationships, which reflect an orientation to the world (in the form of the animal body and the surrounding ecologies) that mediates human interaction with the environment. It also helps to show that the more we try to take responsibility for those bodies—in terms of knowledge, in terms of energy—the more we require the environment to reflect our conditions and the less tolerant we become of failure.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Radical here is meant to describe the specific approach to cultivating meat, not the general attitude toward technological salvation which reflects a kind of ecological modernization.

  2. While the present approach to in vitro meat reflects more recent advances in tissue culture and experiments with stem cells, the idea of growing meat without the animal has a longer history. Scientific experimentation with chicken heart tissue conducted by Alexi Carrell (see Jiang 2012) led to boosterism (Churchill 1931) and trepidation (Oboler 1937; Pohl and Kornbluth 1969).

  3. That medium currently involves fetal bovine serum, which does not escape the need for animal bodies in a continual phase of the process. But efforts to engineer a viable, vegetable based derivate for that medium are ongoing.

  4. Those versed in sci-fi may be familiar with Terry Bisson's short story, "They're Made Out of Meat" (Bisson 1991), or Michel Faber's novel, Under the Skin (2000), both of which point out that, well, humans are made of meat, which could be cultivated in the same process. Not so rare, but certainly exotic.

  5. It remains to be seen, in the age of terroir and other forms of specified or place-based food appreciation, whether this technology would seek to erase animal origins, or create quality lines associated with especially desirable animals.

  6. Critiques about the size of the award not even approaching the cost of the research (Engber 2008). The contest recently expired without a winner, though PETA sees big positive strides being taken ("PETA's ‘In Vitro'…" 2014).

  7. Heidegger's view of technology, especially in its relationship to Being, is not beyond critique. For example, Verbeek (2005) offers a useful analysis of the limitations of Heidegger's nostalgia for a more pure form of relationship.

References

  • Animal Welfare on the Farm. http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/welfare/farm/index_en.htm. Accessed 17 March 2014.

  • Bisson, T. (1991). They’re made out of meat. Omni Magazine, 13(7), 54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, W. (2001). Making Meat: Science, Technology, and American Poultry Production. Technology and Culture, 42(4), 631–664.

  • Bulliet, R. W. (2005). Hunters, herders, and hamburgers: the past and future of human-animal relationships. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannavò, P. (2010). Listening to the ‘Yuck Factor’: Why In-Vitro meat may be too much to digest, American Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Washington, DC. (panel: “Digesting Nature”).

  • Churchill, W. (1931). Fifty Years Hence. Strand Magazine, http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/fifty-years-hence/. Accessed 17 March 2014.

  • Cook, C. (2010). Sliced and diced: The labor you eat. In D. Imhoff (Ed.), The CAFO reader: The tragedy of industrial animal factories (pp. 232–239). Calif.: Watershed Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deych, R. (2005). How one vegan views in-vitro meat. http://www.rrrina.com/invitro_meat.htm. Accessed 2 June 2011.

  • Edelman, P. E., McFarland, D. C., Mironov, V. A., & Matheny, J. G. (2004). In vitro cultured meat production. NewHarvest.org, http://www.new-harvest.org/img/files/Invitro.pdf. Accessed 6 April 2008.

  • Edgerton, D. (2007). The shock of the old: Technology and global history since 1900. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engber, D. (2008). The Bogus $1 Million Meat Prize. slate.com, http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2008/04/the_bogus_1_million_meat_prize.html. Accessed 24 March 2014.

  • Faber, M. (2000). Under the skin. New York: Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiddes, N. (1991). Meat, a natural symbol. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foer, J. S. (2009). Eating animals. New York: Little, Brown and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fountain, H. (2013a). Building a $325,000 Burger. The New York Times, 14 May 2013, D1.

  • Fountain, H. (2013b). Frying Up a Lab-Grown Hamburger. The New York Times, 5 August 2013, D5.

  • Galusky, W. (2010). Playing Chicken: Technologies of domestication, food, and self. Science as Culture, 19(1), 15–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology, and other essays. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, P. D., & Dacey, A. (2008). Vegetarian meat: Could technology save animals and satisfy meat eaters? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 21(6), 579–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, R. (2006). Putting meat on the American table: Taste, technology, transformation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Imhoff, D. (2010). The CAFO reader: The tragedy of industrial animal factories. Healdsburg, Calif: Watershed Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, L. (2012). Alexis Carrel’s Immortal Chick Heart Tissue Cultures (1912–1946). Embryo Project Encyclopedia, http://embryo.asu.edu/handle/10776/3937. Accessed 17 March 2014.

  • Jones, N. (2010). A taste of things to come? Nature, 468, 752–753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joy, M. (2008). Strategic action for animals: A handbook on strategic movement building, organizing, and activism for animal liberation. New York: Lantern Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keith, L. (2009). The vegetarian myth: Food, justice and sustainability. Crescent City, Ca: Flashpoint Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirby, D. (2010). Animal factory: The looming threat of industrial pig, dairy, and poultry farms to humans and the environment. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krakauer, E. L. (1998). The disposition of the subject: Reading Adorno’s dialectic of technology. Evanston, Ill: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landecker, H. (2007). Culturing life: How cells became technologies. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapham, L. H. (2013). Man and beast. Lapham’s Quarterly, VI(2), 13–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (2002). Morality and technology: The end of the means. Theory, Culture & Society, 19(5/6), 247–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Logsdon, G. (2004). All flesh is grass: The pleasures and promises of pasture farming. Athens: Swallow Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McPhee, J. (1989). The control of nature. New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, J. W. (2012). The myth of sustainable meat. The New York Times, 12, A31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michel, M. (2012). McDonald’s US pledges to phase out sow stalls. GlobalMeatNews.com, http://www.globalmeatnews.com/Livestock/McDonald-s-US-pledges-to-phase-out-sow-stalls. Accessed 17 March 2014.

  • Norman, D. A. (2011). Living with complexity. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, J. (2012). Discipline and distancing: Confined pigs in the factory farm Gulag. In A. Gross & A. Vallely (Eds.), Animals and the human imagination: A companion to animal studies (pp. 121–151). New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oboler, A. (1937). Chicken heart [Radio series episode]. In Lights Out. Retrieved from https://archive.org/download/LightsOutoldTimeRadio/LightsOut-1937-03-10ChickenHeart.mp3. Accessed 18 March 2014.

  • Ogle, M. (2013). In meat we trust: An unexpected history of carnivore America. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrow, C. (2011). Normal accidents: Living with high risk technologies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • PETA’s ‘In Vitro’ Chicken Contest (2014) http://www.peta.org/features/vitro-meat-contest/. Accessed 24 March.

  • Philpott, T. (2010). Squeezed to the last drop: The loss of family farms. In D. Imhoff (Ed.), The CAFO reader: The tragedy of industrial animal factories (pp. 176–181). Calif.: Watershed Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pluhar, E. (2010). Meat and morality: Alternatives to factory farming. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 23(5), 455–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pohl, F., & Kornbluth, C. M. (1969). The space merchants. New York: Walker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollan, M. (2006). The omnivore’s dilemma: A natural history of four meals. New York: Penguin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salatin, J. (1995). Salad bar beef. Swoope, Va: Polyface.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saletan, W. (2006). The Conscience of a Carnivore. slate.com, http://www.slate.com/id/2142547/. Accessed 23 May 2011.

  • Schonwald, J. (2009). Future Fillet. University of Chicago Magazine, http://magazine.uchicago.edu/0906/features/future_fillet.shtml. Accessed 2 June 2011.

  • Scott, J.C. (1998). Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. New Haven: Yale University Press.

  • Simon, D. R. (2013). Meatonomics: How the rigged economics of meat and dairy make you consume too much-and how to eat better, live longer, and spend smarter. San Francisco, CA: Conari Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, P. 2013. The world’s first cruelty-free hamburger. The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/05/worlds-first-cruelty-free-hamburger. Accessed 18 March 2014.

  • Soper, K. (1996). Nature/’nature’. In G. Robertson, M. Mash, L. Tickner, J. Bird, B. Curtis, & T. Putnam (Eds.), FutureNatural: Nature, science, culture (pp. 22–34). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Specter, M. (2011). Test-tube burgers. The New Yorker, 23, 32–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Striffler, S. (2005). Chicken: The dangerous transformation of America’s favorite food. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stull, D. D., & Broadway, M. J. (2004). Slaughterhouse blues: The meat and poultry industry in North America. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomaselli, P., & Niles, M. (2010). Changing the law: The road to reform. In D. Imhoff (Ed.), The CAFO reader: The tragedy of industrial animal factories (pp. 314–329). Calif.: Watershed Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, P.-P. (2005). What things do: Philosophical reflections on technology, agency, and design. University Park, Pa: Pennsylvania State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vialles, N. (1994). Animal to edible. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warkentin, T. (2006). Dis/integrating animals: Ethical dimensions of the genetic engineering of animals for human consumption. AI & SOCIETY, 20(1), 82–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weis, A. (2013). The ecological hoofprint. London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfson, W. (2002). Lab-Grown Steaks Nearing the Menu. New Scientist, http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3208-labgrown-steaks-nearing-the-menu.html. Accessed 23 May 2011.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wyatt Galusky.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Galusky, W. Technology as Responsibility: Failure, Food Animals, and Lab-grown Meat. J Agric Environ Ethics 27, 931–948 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-014-9508-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-014-9508-9

Keywords

Navigation