Bioethics Case Study
One of the ethical issues that arise from this case is the logging of trees. This instance is especially in cases where there is no intention of replacing the trees or ensuring sustainability. In the case study, the company that has acquired the license has the permission to do so to 25 percent of the whole forest cover without any commitment to preserve and protect the environment. The country also considers granting a license to a biotechnology company. The third issue is cattle ranching already taking place in the cleared areas. All these have the potential to harm the environment of the forest. First, logging will destroy the habitat of the diverse animal and plant population. It will lead to soil erosion and begin a chain of reactions contributing to adverse weather conditions and global warming. Cattle ranching also contributes to greenhouse gas emissions through their release of methane and soil erosion by the leaking of nutrients as a result of the pesticides and herbicides that such ranches use. For all the benefits that emerge from the use of biotechnology, they could also harm the ecosystem. According to Thomas (104), one needs to analyze biotechnology through the lens of three varieties of ethics. The first is the ethics of conviction, for example, if it is ethical to modify a living organism. The second, the ethics of responsibility, focuses on the consequences of the actions against the ecosystem, and the third, ethics of value, analyze ones driving force for specific activities.
Each of the actors in the case study has different perspectives on how to use the forest for their benefit. For the government of the country, they view the forest as a resource and a possible avenue to not only offset their debts but also gain more revenue through the licenses to the international companies. The people of the country could also view the forest as a natural resource that could assist in developing their country. However, for the natives around the area, it is a source of their livelihood. The perspective of the logging company is that they will acquire logs from a rich source that they can sell or use for construction purposes. For the US market, they view it as a chance to get more beef as the cattle ranches are bound to expand to more cleared areas. The biotechnology company sees this as a chance to venture into a vibrant ecosystem with high biodiversity, most of which has not been discovered or exploited. The animals and plants in the forest are at the most disadvantageous position. They view the move as an encroachment to their habitat, which could lead to the destruction of plants, killing of animals, or even improve their impact on the environment.
For the government of the country, their pro is that they will raise revenue to pay debts and develop their nation. The con is that their actions will lead to the destruction of the forest, leading to environmental adversities. For the people in the country, the pro is that they will enjoy the development that will come about. However, the con is the loss of a source of livelihood, especially for the natives and changes in the environment around the whole country. The pro for the logging company is profiting from the logging activities, although the con will be facing the native communities’ resistance. The US market stands to gain more beef, although the demand may decrease with the growth of supply. For the biotechnology company, they are also bound to make profits as they make their discoveries and successful research missions (Wu and Fuller, 28). However, they also stand to face resistance and opposition from activists against such use of the forest. For the animals and plants, the introduction of the biotechnology company could be a pro that could assist them in becoming more disease resistant or reducing their impact on the environment. The con of the activities is that it could destroy their homes and lead to the death of some plants and animals.
Biotechnology could be useful or distractive to the biodiversity in the forest. As a result, before granting the license, the government should inquire and get information on the exact work that they want to do in the forest. If the company intends to carry out activities such as research into improving the disease resistance abilities of the plants or enhancing the breeding capabilities of the animals, it can grant the license (Moses and Alain, 4009). However, in cases where the activities of the company could lead to negative impacts on the health of the plants and animals, then the government could reconsider granting the license or decide that the company change their activities.
Works Cited
Moses, Tessa, and Alain Goossens. “Plants for human health: greening biotechnology and synthetic biology.” Journal of experimental botany 68.15 (2017): 4009.
Thomas, Frédéric. “Ethics of Biotechnology Research.” Science 185 (2018): 103-110
Wu, Guoyao, and Fuller W. Bazer. “Application of new biotechnologies for improvements in swine nutrition and pork production.” Journal of animal science and biotechnology 10.1 (2019): 28.