EurSafe 2018 Programmheft - Vetmeduni · professional development, assessment methods for professional learning and the inflammatory process associated with various equine diseases

ethics

roles

and

responsibilities

P ROF E S S I ON A LS

IN

FOOD

CHAINS

EurSafe Congress 2018 | June 13-16

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Organizing Team 2 Venue 3 Information for Participants 5 Plenary Speakers 8 Workshops on “Professional Ethics”, 15th June 2018 10 Programme 22 Thursday, 14th June 2018 22 Friday, 15th June 2018 28 Saturday, 16th June 2018 33 Posters 35 Abstracts not published in the Proceedings book 37 Participants 39

2

ORGANIZING TEAM

HEADS OF ORGANIZING TEAM

Herwig Grimm Messerli Research Institute, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal Studies

Angela Kallhoff

Institute of Philosophy, University of Vienna

Svenja Springer Messerli Research Institute, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal Studies

MEMBERS OF ORGANIZING TEAM

Andreas Aigner Messerli Research Institute, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal Studies

Judith Benz-Schwarzburg

Messerli Research Institute, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal Studies

Samuel Camenzind Messerli Research Institute, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal Studies

Christian Dürnberger


Martin Huth Messerli Research Institute, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal Studies

Susana Monsó


Eva Schwarzinger Messerli Research Institute, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal Studies

Elena Thurner


Kerstin Weich Messerli Research Institute, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal Studies

3

VENUE

CONGRESS

Messerli Research Institute University of Veterinary Medicine, Medical University of Vienna and University of Vienna Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria

© Vetmeduni Vienna © Vetmeduni Vienna

© Vetmeduni Vienna

entrance

CA (Banquet Hall) = venue of the congress

4

SOCIAL PROGRAMME 1: Reception | 13th of June 2018, 6 PM

Banquet Hall, ground floor | Veterinaerplatz 1, 1210 Vienna

SOCIAL PROGRAMME 2: Congress Dinner | 15th of June 2018, 7 PM

Senate Chamber, Vienna City Hall | Lichtenfelsgasse 2, 1010 Vienna

DIRECTIONS FROM THE VENUE OF THE CONGRESS TO THE VIENNA CITY HALL

1) 25: At the station “Josef-Baumann-Gasse” take the tram line 25 (heading to Aspern), get off at the station “Kagran” (2 stops). 2) U1: At the station “Kagran” take the underground line U1 (heading to Oberlaa), get off at the station “Praterstern” (5 stops). 3) U2: At the station “Praterstern” take the underground line U2 (heading to Karlsplatz), get off at the station “Rathaus” (4 stops).

https://www.wienerlinien.at/media/files/2018/svp-ab-sept-2017_217934.pdf

https://www.wien.gv.at/english/cityhall/images/map.gif

www.wienerlinien.at

SCHNELLVERBINDUNGEN IN WIEN

Infostelle derWiener Linien

Ticketstelle derWiener Linien

U-Bahn-Linie

S-Bahn-Linie

Lokalbahn Wien-Baden

City Airport Train(Eigener Tarif,VOR-Tickets ungültig)

Vienna InternationalBusterminal

Kundenzentrumder Wiener Linien(U3 Erdberg)

Park & Ride

Troststraße

Altes Landgut

Alaudagasse

Neulaa

Oberlaa

Nußdorf

Oberdöbling

Leopoldau

Krottenbachstr.

Gersthof

Hernals

Breitensee

Penzing

Weidling

au

Purkers

dorf-S

anato

rium

Haders

dorf

Speising

Hetzendorf

Atzgersdorf

Liesing Blumental

QuartierBelvedereMatzleinsdorfer

Platz

Schedifkaplatz

Schöpfwerk

Gutheil-Schoder-Gasse

Inzersdorf LokalbahnNeu Erlaa

Schönbrunner Allee

Vösendorf-Siebenhirten

Grillgasse

Kledering

RennwegBiocenter ViennaSt. Marx

Geisel-bergstr.

Zentralfriedhof

Kaiserebersdorf

Schwechat

Haidestraße

Praterkai

Stadlau

Erzherzog-Karl-Straße

Süßenbrunn

Gerasdorf

Siemensstraße

Brünner Straße

Jedlersdorf

Strebersdorf

Traisengasse

Franz-Josefs-Bahnhof

MessePrater

Krieau

Kaisermühlen VICWähringer Straße Volksoper

Schottentor

Schwedenplatz

Kagraner Platz

Aderklaaer Straße

Großfeldsiedlung

Kardinal-Nagl-PlatzGumpendorferStraße

Michelbeuern AKH

JosefstädterStraße

BurggasseStadthalle

Kendlerstraße

Ottakring

John-straße

Schwegler-straße

Niederhof-straße

Thaliastraße

Alser Straße

Nußdorfer Straße

Jäger-straße

Friedensbrücke

Dresdner Straße

Handelskai

Floridsdorf

Stadt-park

Karlsplatz

Stadion

Prater-stern

Keplerplatz

Reumannplatz

Landstraße (Bhf. Wien Mitte)

Rochusgasse

Schlachthausgasse

Erdberg

Gasometer

Enkplatz

Zipperer-straße

Simmering

Donauinsel

Alte Donau

Kagran

Rennbahnweg

Rathaus

Bahnhof Meidling

HütteldorferStraße

Volks-theater

Roßauer Lände

Taubstummen-gasse

Südtiroler PlatzHauptbahnhof

Taborstraße

Nestroypl.

Neue Donau

Heiligenstadt

Spittelau

Vorgartenstraße

Museums-quartier

Hütteld

orf

Ober S

t. Veit

Unter S

t. Veit

Braunsc

hweig

-

gasse

Hietzing

Schön

brunn

Meidling

Haupts

traße

Läng

enfeld

g.

Margare

ten-

gürte

l

Ketten

brücke

n-

gasse

Herren

gasse

Stuben

tor

Schottenring

Pilgram

-

gasse

Ziegle

rg.

Neuba

ug.Westbahnhof

Wolf in d

er Au

StephansplatzDonaumarina

Donaustadt-brücke

Hardeggasse

Donauspital

Aspern Nord

Am Schöpfwerk

Perfektastraße

Alterlaa

Tscherttegasse

Siebenhirten WLB Wiener Neudorf, Baden (Endstation)

Erlaaer Straße

Seestadt

Aspernstraße

Hausfeld-straße

Hirschstetten

© W

iene

r Lin

ien,

Sep

tem

ber 2

017

Lichtenfelsgasse

§ subway station “Rathaus“,

§ exit at the subway station “Josefstädterstrasse“, „Landesgerichtstrasse“

§ cross trafic light and then straight ahead into Lichtenfelsgasse

5

INFORMATION

REGISTRATION DESK

The Registration Desk will be located on the ground floor of the Banquet Hall, next to the entrance. It will be open at 11:30 on 13th of June and at 8:00 from 14th until 15th of June.

NAME BADGES

For identification and security purposes, participants must wear their name badges when in the venue. The use of the badge is mandatory for the access to the coffee breaks and lunches.

MEALS

Coffee breaks, lunches and the welcome cocktail will be served at the ground floor of the Banquet Hall.

Participants with food restrictions should ask the catering enterprise for their special meals.

PRESENTATIONS INSTRUCTIONS

For each presentation 25 minutes are scheduled. We suggest restricting your talk to a maximum of 20 minutes and 5 minutes of discussion. After 25 minutes the chair will allow the audience to change between rooms.

Presentations must be stored on a USB key and are transferred to the available laptops. For technical reasons, it is NOT permitted to connect your own laptop to the presenter.

Presentations must be saved in pptx format (power point standard format) and NOT in ppt format. An audio system and a laser pointer will in place for you.

Please upload your presentation 15 minutes before the parallel session starts on the provided laptop. Our staff will support you, if you have any trouble.

POSTER PRESENTATIONS

POSTER SESSION: 15th of June 2018, 15:30-16:15, Festsaal

All posters will be exhibited on the first floor in the festival hall of the event building during the congress. Posters should be in DIN-format A0 (approximately 1.20m high and 0.90m wide).

We kindly ask you to pin your poster on the pin board provided for you on Wednesday noon before the workshops (13th June 2018, 11.30-12.30pm) or Thursday morning before the welcome (14th June 2018, 8.00-9.00am).

6

Pin boards and pins will of course be available for you. Conference staff will be present to provide assistance.

During the poster session we ask you to be close to your poster so that participants can ask you questions directly.

PARALLEL SESSIONS

Parallel sessions will be held on the first floor in the “Festsaal”, the “Festsaal Erweiterung”, the “Großes Sitzungszimmer” and the “Kleines

Sitzungszimmer”. Please find below a plan of the first floor.

FIRST FLOOR

© Vetmeduni Vienna

7

INTERNET ACCESS

Wireless Internet is freely available in the symposium venue.

How to connect to the WLAN "Veranstaltungen":

User Name: EurSafe2018

Password: b4luNSRo

1. Activate your wireless connection.

2. Select the wireless network "Veranstaltungen".

3. Wait until the connection is established.

4. Open a web browser of your choice (e.g. Internet Explorer, Mozilla

Firefox, Safari, Google Chrome).

5. Open any website (e.g. http://www.google.com/). You are redirected

to a login page.

6. Enter user name and password (see above).

7. You will see the message "Login successful". Now you can use the

internet without restrictions (e-mail, web browsing, Skype, etc.).

Attention: After inactivity for several minutes or connection loss you have to login again.

WLAN eduroam: With your usual access data you can gain access to the WLAN on the entire campus of the Vetmeduni, Vienna.

8

PLENARY SPEAKERS

Daniela Battaglia

Daniela Battaglia is Livestock Production Officer in the Animal Production and Health Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). She is responsible for the activities in support of Animal Welfare. Prior to joining the FAO she worked for the European Commission and was involved in activities and co-operations in the fields of animal production and health; livestock and rural development, mainly in Latin America, North Africa and the Middle East. She has also worked in the field of livestock and rural development in Peru, Bolivia, Suriname, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Israel and Tunisia.

Webpage http://www.fao.org/ag/againfo/themes/animal-welfare/aw-direc/search/detail/en/c/8068/

Vincent Blok

Vincent Blok is Associate Professor in Sustainable Entrepreneurship, Business Ethics and responsible innovation at the Management Studies Chair Group, and Associate Professor in Philosophy of Management, Technology & Innovation at the Philosophy Chair Group, Wageningen University. He received his PhD degree in philosophy at Leiden University with a specialization in philosophy of technology. He held various management functions in the health care sector and was director of the Louis Bolk Institute, an international research institute in the field of organic and sustainable agriculture, nutrition and health care. His research focuses on Business Ethical Issues in Sustainable Entrepreneurship, Philosophy of Management, Technology & Innovation, and Responsible Innovation in the private sector in several (European) research projects.

Webpage https://www.wur.nl/en/Persons/dr.-V-Vincent-Blok.htm

9

Stephen May

Stephen May is Professor of Equine Medicine and Surgery and Deputy Principal at the Royal Veterinary College.

He was instrumental in initiating key skills courses for veterinary and biological science students, which include communication skills, leadership and team-working, scientific, clinical and ethical reasoning, and professionalism. His research focuses on the scholarship of primary care, professional development, assessment methods for professional learning and the inflammatory process associated with various equine diseases. He is currently the Junior Vice-President of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons, and the Senior Vice-President of the European Board of Veterinary Specialisation (EBVS).

Webpage http://www.rvc.ac.uk/about/our-people/stephen-may

Clare Palmer

Clare Palmer is Professor of Philosophy and Cornerstone Fellow in Liberal Arts in the Department of Philosophy, Texas A&M University. She obtained her Bachelor degree in Theology and her Doctor of Philosophy at Oxford University, UK. She has authored several books in ethics, including “Animal Ethics in Context” (2010) and “Companion Animal Ethics“ (2015, co-authored with Peter Sandoe and Sandra Corr). Her research concentrates on environmental and animal ethics, ethics and emerging technologies, ethical theory and environmental studies. She serves on the editorial board of a number of journals, including Environmental Values, Agricultural and Environmental Ethics and Environmental Humanities.

Webpage https://philosophy.tamu.edu/people/clare-palmer/

Wednesday, 13th June 2018

10

WORKSHOPS ON “PROFESSIONAL ETHICS”: WEDNESDAY, 13th OF JUNE 2018

11:30-12:30 Registration

12:45-12:55 Welcome

13:00-15:00 Workshops Parallel Session I

1. Teaching Veterinary Ethics: The Case of Study

Cases

2. Regulation Plant Biotech 2.0: CRISPR potato as a

case study

3. Seafood Ethics: Fishing for Food or Feed?

4. The Harm-Benefit-Analysis in Directive

2010/63/EU - Should ethics review be public

deliberation or an expert evaluation mechanism?

15:00-15:30 Coffee Break

15:30-17:30 Workshops Parallel Session II

5. The Veterinary Professions added value in human-

animal interaction

6. Responsible Research and Innovation in

Agriculture and Food

7. Organic Closed Recirculation Systems For

Aquaculture - Ethical Challenges, Legal Context,

Political Consequences

8. New Directions in Plant Ethics

18:00 Reception |Banquet Hall, ground floor


11

1. Teaching Veterinary Ethics: The Case of Study Cases

1:00-3:00 pm | Banquet Hall, first floor, Festsaal

Chairs: Kerstin Weich (Messerli Research Institute, Vienna), Martin Huth (Messerli Research Institute, Vienna) | [email protected]

Context and Aims

Teaching Veterinary Ethics is a field of high topicality and urgency since ethics is increasingly implemented and significant in the curricula of universities for veterinary medicine all over Europe and beyond.

Hence, the questions of content, methodology, and learning outcomes have become crucial in several ways. At the intersection of these three fundamental issues we find the study case that provides an access to a specific content (e.g. a clinical case or a certain policy in veterinary public health structure of decision-making, conceptualization of health, etc.), builds a core methodology of didactics, and frames learning outcomes. The experience that concrete cases are essential in teaching veterinary ethics is widespread. However, it seems crucial to raise the awareness of tacit implications of study cases. As Thomas Kuhn (2012) (and, drawing on Kuhn, Bernard Rollin, cf. 1998) has shown, the use of “exemplars” is highly efficient since it makes cascades of explanation superfluous. But it also contributes to the reiteration of implicit paradigms and to the hidden curriculum (cf. Withcomb 2015) and, hence, sheds light on particular questions and accounts while concealing others. More in general, already Wittgenstein was cautionary with respect to the use of one-sided examples that shape perspectives all too clear (Wittgenstein 1996).

Key Questions

How should study cases be used in teaching veterinary ethics?

How can a singular case provide access to generalizing ethical reflection?

What are the particular strengths of study cases? Where do we face limits of study cases?

How can one avoid the danger of being intrusive by the use of study cases? How is a broadening of the perspective possible?

How can one raise the awareness of the strengths and limits or pitfalls of the use of study cases?

Key Words: Study cases, veterinary ethics, didactics, paradigm, hidden curriculum


12

2. Regulation Plant Biotech 2.0: CRISPR potato as a case study

1:00-3:00 pm | Banquet Hall, first floor, Festsaal Erweiterung

Chairs: Per Sandin (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala), Karin Edvardsson Björnberg (Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm), Helena Röcklinsberg (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala), Mickey Gjerris (University of Copenhagen) | [email protected]

Context and Aims

Potatoes are as staple food in many areas of the world. It is also a food with strong cultural significance, not least in Northern Europe.

A main component of potatoes is starch. Starch consists of amylose and amylopectin. The first substance has a low glycemic index and is consequently regarded as being healthier. At the same time, there is a multitude of industrial applications for both amylose and amylopectin on their own. Within a Swedish research program (Mistra Biotech) a potato that produces starch with more amylose and an altered amylopectin structure has been developed using the technology of RNA interference (RNAi). A new, similar, amylose potato, is currently being developed using directed mutagenesis with the aid of the CRISPR/Cas9 technique.

Such technologies are currently in a state of regulatory uncertainty in the EU. It is yet unclear whether they will be classified as GMOs or not. In the former case, their introduction will be surrounded with a complex and lengthy review procedure, in the latter case not. This has far-reaching consequences for the commercialization of such crops.

Using the Low-GI CRISPR potato as a starting point, we will discuss the ethical underpinnings and challenging of regulating such crops, i.e. plants developed with new types of genetic engineering with intended health benefits (and other non-agronomic benefits).

Invited Discussants

Dennis Eriksson, Karin Edvardsson Björnberg, Bjørn Kåre Myskja, Paul B Thompson

Key Questions

Are there morally relevant differences between crops developed with CRISPR/Cas9 and other technologies?

How should this be reflected in regulation?

Key Words: CRISPR/Cas9, genetic engineering, EU regulation


13

3. Seafood Ethics: Fishing for Food or Feed?

1:00-3:00 pm | Banquet Hall, first floor, Großes Sitzungszimmer

Chairs: Matthias Kaiser (University of Bergen), Thomas Potthast (University of Tübingen) | [email protected]

Context and Aims

This 3-part workshop aims to explore issues emerging in the nascent field of seafood ethics, which encompasses the descriptive and normative study of values, value-based trade-offs, and ethical dilemmas of stakeholders and citizens along diverse seafood value chains.

Part (1) is a practical ethics exercise where participants will deliberate upon and prioritize values and principles in relation to scenarios evaluated for their sustainable and ethical management of marine resources. The exercise will be done individually and in groups, with plenary report backs and discussions.

Part (2) is a set of brief presentations by three interdisciplinary experts to stimulate dialogue, critical reflection, and collaborative thinking on emerging research in seafood ethics and its relation to marine resource sustainability, policy, and governance: (i) We will present how stakeholder values were explored in the Canadian Pacific herring fishery conflict, highlighting methodological and governance challenges and new research to update the value set and incorporate ethical principles in the Norwegian herring fishery and aquaculture context; (ii) we will introduce an emerging theory of values to shed light on how the plurality of values in European society may be approached by mapping value landscapes in seafood value chains, i.e., from seafood producer, processor, distributor, retailer to consumer; and (iii) we will critically evaluate the practical ethics method and the utility of exploring values in resource management and analyze how ethical principles and indicators may offer alternative or additional approaches to sustainable management.

Part (3) is a facilitated discussion with participants to constructively debate the role and effectiveness of seafood ethics, values, and ethical principles in sustainable marine resource management.

Key Questions

How are values, principles, attitudes, beliefs, preferences, and behaviours interrelated? How can these be investigated as part of a practical ethics or value-based approach to sustainable marine resource management? What are the bottlenecks?

What is needed for sound ethical assessments of marine resource


14

management, seafood policy and governance? What ‘bottom-up’ and ‘top-down’ processes are needed to capture individual and societal values in normative assessments?

When analyzing complex seafood value chains, linking multiple social actors from diverse cultures with a plurality of values, how can the pluralistic value landscapes be reconciled within society to formulate seafood policy that is both just and sustainable?

Key Words: Values, practical ethics, seafood ethics, marine resource management, sustainability, trade-offs.


15

4. The Harm-Benefit-Analysis in Directive 2010/63/EU - Should ethics review be public deliberation or an expert evaluation mechanism?

1:00-3:00 pm | Banquet Hall, first floor, Kleines Sitzungszimmer

Chairs: Matthias Eggel (Institute for Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich), Peter Sandøe (Department of Food and Ressource Economics, University of Copenhagen), Herwig Grimm (Messerli Research Institute), Anna Olsson (Laboratory Animal Science, Institute for Research and Innovation in Health, University of Porto) | [email protected]

Context and Aims

Directive 2010/63/EU regulates the use of animals for scientific purposes through its implementation into the legislation of EU member states. It mandates that every project proposal involving procedures on living non-human vertebrates and cephalopods has to be approved in a review process including a "Harm-Benefit-Analysis“ (HBA), to assess „“whether the harm to the animals in terms of suffering, pain and distress is justified by the expected outcome taking into account ethical consideration and may ultimately benefit humans, animals or the environment“ (1, article 38d). From this it follows that a project is only ethically and legally justified if the benefit can be expected to outweigh the harms inflicted on animals. Whereas the national competent authorities are responsible for the authorization, the underlying evaluation is often carried out with the help of advising experts and committees. To assess harm to animals, potential benefits to humans, animals and the environment and evaluate whether the requirement for ethical consideration of animals is met, requires evaluating the scientific justification of a proposal (strength of hypothesis, experimental design, etc.) as well as the ethical implications (moral status of animal, weighing of benefit against harms etc.).

Efforts have been made to systematize the assessment through the development of methods and scoring systems. Systematic assessment methods are useful for the aspects of evaluation where there is a well developed field of knowledge and experts can agree on a method. Of these components, this is the case for assessment of the scientific standard, strength and scientific importance of a proposal (matters which are part of the usual peer-review process for funding or publication) and for assessing animal harm (for which animal welfare science and veterinary medicine have expertise). But other components seem to have more to do with values and perspectives. Defining systematic methods for assessing ethical considerations seems to defy the purpose of assessing something which is arguably a matter of public deliberation.

As the review of projects with animals is mandated through Directive


16

2010/63/EU, it seems to combine elements for expert assessment and elements for public deliberation. This raises questions about the composition of committees and about the appropriate level of assessment.

As a starting point for this workshop, we will ask if the ethics review of animal research is a matter of expert assessment or public deliberation. We aim for a critical discussion of how to best integrate or separate the evaluation of projects for authorization and the public deliberation over overarching matters of animal research ethics.

Key Words: Harm-Benefit-Analysis (HBA), ethics review, Project evaluation, Directive 2010/63/EU


17

5. The Veterinary Professions added value in human-animal interaction

3:30-5:30 pm | Banquet Hall, first floor, Festsaal

Chairs: Franck L.B. Meijboom (Utrecht University), Herwig Grimm (Messerli Research Institute, Vienna) | [email protected]

Context and Aims

Veterinary professionals are confronted with a number of (new) developments. These include the changes in the scope of veterinary care, e.g. from curative to preventive medicine, from care for individual animals to veterinary care for collectives, but also the development towards One Health and One Welfare.

This process also has an effect on veterinary ethics. Ethical questions are no longer restricted to moral problems at the level of individual clinical cases, but include complex issues that require new types of ethical reflection, discussion on professional responsibility and reflections on the public position of the veterinary profession. Furthermore, it raises questions about the professional role of veterinarians in the debate on sustainable human-animal interactions, including animal use and animal production.

In this special session we aim to discuss this development and present some of its examples in Europe (e.g., UK and The Netherlands).

Key Questions

What are the effects of recent animal related debates in Europe (e.g., public debates on animal welfare, One Health, sustainability) on veterinary ethics?

What are the examples of how veterinarians/ veterinary professions address new challenges?

What should be the role of the veterinary profession in public debates on issues such as animal welfare, One Health, sustainability?

Key Words: Vethics, Professional Ethics, Professional Integrity, Animal Welfare


18

6. Responsible Research and Innovation in Agriculture and Food

3:30-5:30 pm | Banquet Hall, first floor, Festsaal Erweiterung

Chairs: Vincent Blok (Wageningen University), Bernice Bovenkerk (Wageningen University), Bart Gremmen (Wageningen University) | [email protected]

Context and Aims

Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) is an emerging field in the European research and innovation (R&I) policy context that aims to balance economic, socio-cultural and environmental aspects in innovation processes (European Commission 2011). Because technological innovations can contribute significantly to the solution of societal challenges like climate change or food security, but can also have negative societal consequences, it is assumed that social and ethical aspects should be considered during the R&I process. By involving multiple stakeholders in R&I processes at an early stage, “societal actors and innovators become mutually responsive to each other with a view to the (ethical) acceptability, sustainability and societal desirability of the innovation process and its marketable products” (von Schomberg 2013). The consideration of ethical and social aspects during R&I processes will lead not only to technological innovations which are ethical acceptable, but also sustainable and socially desirable (cf. Matter 2011). The concept of RRI expresses the ambition to address societal needs, next to the more traditional objectives of R&I like economic growth, profit maximization, competitive advantage etc. (cf. Blok & Lemmens 2015). This workshop aims to explore the opportunities, advantages and disadvantages of the emerging concept of RRI in the field of agricultural and food ethics.

Key Questions

How can the concept of RRI shed a new light on social-ethical issues in agriculture and food production and consumption? Does the concept of RRI help to identify and solve social-ethical issues in the field of agriculture and food? How can the application of RRI frameworks help to better embed agricultural and food technologies in society? How can the RRI framework be applied in the assessment of controversial emerging technologies in the agricultural sector (PLF, genetic modification etc.)? How can the RRI concept be applied to improve animal welfare? Key Words: Responsible Research and Innovation, agricultural technology, food technology, Agricultural ethics, food ethics


19

7. Organic Closed Recirculation Systems For Aquaculture – Ethical Challenges, Legal Context, Political Consequences

3:30-5:30 pm | Banquet Hall, first floor, Großes Sitzungszimmer

Chairs: S. Bergleiter (Naturland – Verband für ökologischen Landbau e.V., Germany) / M. Böhm, S. Meisch, T. Potthast (International Centre for Ethics in the Sciences and Humanities, University of Tuebingen) / H. Seibel, Lina Weirup, Carsten Schulz (Gesellschaft für Marine Aquakultur mbH, Buesum, Germany) / M. Stark (Seafood Advisory Ltd., Switzerland) / L. Voget-Kleschin (Philosophisches Seminar, Philosophie und Ethik der Umwelt, University of Kiel) | [email protected] [email protected]

Context and Aims

EU regulations explicitly preclude closed recirculation systems for aquaculture grow-out from organic certification because they are not close enough to nature (Regulation (EEC) No. 710/2009). Meanwhile, according to other EU regulations, one criteria for organic food production is its contribution to sustainable development (Regulation (EEC) No. 834/2007). Against this background, one might argue that in spite of their distance to nature closed recirculation systems are innovative solutions to deal with sustainability issues in food production. Against this background, the question arises if the organic movement should lobby for an organic certification of closed recirculation systems and why.

Key Questions

This workshop will discuss ethical challenges and political consequences that an organic certification will present.

Can closed recirculation systems for aquaculture really contribute to a more sustainable aquaculture production and/or a greater fish welfare?

(Why) Do they need to be certificated as organic at all? Would a new label be better? On the other hand, would a new label increase the flood of labels?

What does the potential organic certification of closed recirculation systems for aquaculture mean for the self-conception of the organic movement (closeness to nature vs. innovative organic food production)?

How can the concerns of consumers be addressed that might have different expectations from organic food production (closeness to nature)?

What are the legal consequences of an organic certification of closed recirculation systems for aquaculture? What are potential spill-overs to other forms of organic food production?


20

8. New Directions in Plant Ethics

3:30-5:30 pm | Banquet Hall, first floor, Kleines Sitzungszimmer

Chairs: Angela Kallhoff (Vienna), Maria Schorgenhumer (Vienna), Marcello Di Paola (Vienna/Rome), Gianfranco Pellegrino (LUISS University Rome) | [email protected] ; [email protected]

Context and Aims

Plant Ethics is an emerging field in environmental ethics whose ramifications extend to numerous other fields including bioethics, agricultural, food, professional and business ethics, and the philosophy of technology. This workshop presents and explores plant ethics as a focal field of inquiry that is developing its own argumentative resources at both a theoretical and an applied level.

The ethics of plants focuses on the value of plants, the duties we may have towards and regarding plants, and the ways in which we should relate to plants in different contexts. When it comes to applied plant ethics, the challenge is that of constructing a coherent set of analytical tools that might help us navigate the many different domains in which plant manipulation and cultivation are of relevance. These domains include forestry, agriculture, health, genetic research, biodiversity conservation, diet and consumption, climate adaptation, and the design of resilient cities – among others.

The research project “New Directions in Plant Ethics”, based at the Philosophy Department at the University of Vienna and led by Prof. Angela Kallhoff, has been engaged for the past three years in the exploration of the ethics of plants and their manipulation. The result has been the publication of the volume Plant Ethics: Concepts and Applications (Routledge 2018), edited by the Project team and showcasing a wide variety of approaches to the philosophy of plants from distinguished international scholars.

This EURSAFE workshop is meant to present this work and to explore in some detail issues relating to the production and consumption of plant foods. The book will be briefly presented as a way into the intricacies of plant ethics, while most of the workshop will be devoted to the search of a joint framework for plant and food ethics that may open to a new research agenda where these fields can be mutually informative. The workshop will therefore soon take the form of a dialogue whose main aim is to outline a shared platform for further debate on plants and food production and consumption within the EURSAFE community and society at large.


21

Key Questions

Particular themes and questions that may be addressed are the following:

Is plant ethics capable of shedding new lights on central themes in agriculture and food ethics, and of guiding responsible innovation in the food and agricultural sectors?

What are the most promising strategies for integrating plant and agriculture and food ethics?

What is the moral status of plants, and what are the implications of different views on this topic on the ethics of plant cultivation and consumption?

What makes for ecologically and socially sustainable, and for ethically virtuous plant cultivation?

How can a plant ethics framework be applied in the assessment of agricultural practices that involve deforestation or radical transformations of landscapes?

How can a plant ethics framework be applied in the assessment of agricultural practices that involve emerging food technologies, including genetic modification?

How can ethical reflection on plants be applied to improve animal welfare?

Considering the major impacts that animal farming and animal foods consumption has on local and global environments, the welfare of animals themselves, and the livelihoods of millions of humans, should we all be vegetarians? And is eating plants not morally problematic as well?

What are the moral and political peculiarities of emerging technologies devoted to edible plants production - including gene-editing, diffused computing and robotic farming?

Key Words: Plants, Moral Status, Food, Agriculture, Climate Change, Cities, Gardens

Thursday, 14th June 2018

22

PROGRAMME

THURSDAY, 14th OF JUNE 2018


9:00-9:30 Welcome speeches

Kate Millar (President of the European Society of Agricultural and Food Ethics)

Herwig Grimm and Svenja Springer (on behalf of the EurSafe 2018 Organizing Team)

9:30-10:30 PLENARY SESSION I | Chair: Herwig Grimm The role of the IAEA and FAO in supporting professionals in food chains

Daniela Battaglia, Food and Agriculture Organization of the U.N.


11:00-12:30 PARALLEL SESSION I

A | Professional Responsibility in the Food Chain | Festsaal Chair: Stef Aerts 11:00-11:30 Connecting parties for improving animal welfare in

the food industry M.R.E. Janssens, Rotterdam School of Management,

Erasmus University, the Netherlands 11:30-12:00 Roles and responsibilities in transition? Farmers’

ethics in the bio-economy Z. Robaey, Biotechnology & Society, Department of

Biotechnology, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands

12:00-12:30 Linking professionals in the food chain: a modified

ethical matrix to debate zootechnical interventions H. Grimm, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal-Studies, Messerli Research Institute, Austria


23

B | Ethics of Production and Consumption | Festsaal Erweiterung Chair: Helena Röcklinsberg 11:00-11:30 Toward the research and development of cultured meat for captive carnivorous animals B. Kristensen, Oregon State University, School of History, Philosophy & Religion, USA 11:30-12:00 Don’t be cruel: the significance of cruelty in the current meat-debate

P. Kaiser, Department of Philosophy, University of Vienna, Austria

12:00-12:30 Understanding food markets and their dynamics of exchange

W. Leyk, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen, Theology Department, Ethics (Systematic Theology II / Ethics), Germany

C | Food Politics: Policy and Legislation | Großes Sitzungszimmer Chair: Angela Kallhoff 11:00-11:30 Technology neutrality and regulation of agricultural biotechnology

P. Sandin, Department of Crop Production Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden

11:30-12:00 How should people eat according to the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development?

H. Siipi, Philosophy Unit, University of Turku, Finland 12:00-12:30 Sustainability, ethics, and politics: NGOs’ advocacy discourses on anti-GM food

Y.C. Chiu, Department of Bio-industry Communication and Development, National Taiwan University, Taiwan (R.O.C.)

12:30-13:30 Lunch


24

13:30-15:00 PARALLEL SESSION II

A | Veterinary Ethics: Methods, Concepts and Theory | Festsaal Chair: Franck Meijboom 13:30-14:00 The recognition of animals as patients – the frames of veterinary medicine M. Huth, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal-Studies, Messerli Research Institute, Austria 14:00-14:30 Considering animal patients as subjects? K. Weich, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal-Studies, Messerli Research Institute, Austria 14:30-15:00 Handle with care: an alternative view on livestock medicine J. Karg, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal-Studies, Messerli Research Institute, Austria B | Sustainable Food Production | Festsaal Erweiterung Chair: Simon Meisch 13:30-14:00 Representing non-human animals: committee

composition and agenda M. Vinnari, University of Tampere, Faculty of Management, Finland 14:00-14:30 The challenge of including biodiversity in certification standards of food supply chains S. Stirn, Biodiversity, Evolution and Ecology, Institute for Plant Science and Microbiology, University of Hamburg, Germany 14:30-15:00 Ranging in free-range laying hens: animal welfare and other considerations J.-L. Rault, Institute of Animal Husbandry and Animal Welfare, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria C | Media, Transparency and Trust | Großes Sitzungszimmer Chair: Christian Dürnberger 13:30-14:00 Achieving effective animal protection under the threat of ‘Ag-gag’ laws A.S. Whitfort, The University of Hong Kong, Faculty of Law, Hong Kong


25

14:00-14:30 The GMO debate reloaded – a survey on genome editing in agriculture S.N. Bechtold, Institute Technology-Theology-Natural sciences (TTN) at the Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich, Germany 14:30-15:00 Public opinion on dogs as a first step for solving dog welfare problems C.S. Ophorst, Radboud University & Van Hall Larenstein University of Applied Science, the Netherlands B. Bovenkerk, Wageningen University & Research, the Netherlands D | Animal Ethics | Kleines Sitzungszimmer Chair: Mickey Gjerris 13:30-14:00 Personalism as a ground for moderate anthropocentrism S. Aerts, Odisee University College, Ethology and Animal Welfare, Belgium 14:00-14:30 Objectification and its relation to Kant’s moral philosophy S. Camenzind, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal-Studies, Messerli Research Institute, Austria 14:30-15:00 Legal protection of animal intrinsic value – mere words? B.K. Myskja, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway 15:00-15:30 Coffee Break

15:30-17:00 PARALLEL SESSION III

A | Veterinary Ethics: In Practice | Festsaal Chair: Martin Huth 15:30-16:00 Veterinary responsibilities within the One Health framework J. van Herten, Wageningen University and Research, the Netherlands Royal Veterinary Association of the Netherlands


26

16:00-16:30 The role of Canadian veterinarians in improving calf welfare

C.L. Sumner, Animal Welfare Program, Faculty of Land and Food Systems, University of British Columbia, Canada

16:30-17:00 The vet in the lab: exploring the position of animal professionals in non-therapeutic roles V. Ashall, Centre for Applied Bioethics, School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom B | Biotechnology | Festsaal Erweiterung Chair: Samuel Camenzind 15:30-16:00 The ethical dilemma with governing CRISP/Cas genome editing F. Pirscher, Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Food Policy, Faculty of Natural Science III, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Germany 16:00-16:30 Could crispy crickets be CRISPR-Cas9 crickets – ethical aspects of using new breeding technologies in intensive insect-production M. Gjerris, Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen, Denmark 16:30-17:00 Potato crisps from CRISPR-Cas9 modification – aspects of autonomy and fairness H. Röcklinsberg, Department of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden C | Animal Research | Großes Sitzungszimmer Chair: Herwig Grimm 15:30-16:00 Prosocial animals showing human morality – on normative concepts in natural scientific studies

A. Huber, ABC Welfare Group, School of Life Sciences, University of Lincoln, United Kingdom Division of Animal Welfare, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Bern, Switzerland


27

16:00-16:30 The logic, methodological and practical flaws of the harm-benefit-analysis in Directive 2010/63/EU M. Eggel, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal-Studies, Messerli Research Institute, Austria

Institute for Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Switzerland

16:30-17:00 Raising the stakes in the stakeholder theory: should animals be considered stakeholders by businesses that affect them?

A. Molavi, Utrecht University, Ethics Institute, the Netherlands

D | Veterinary Ethics: In Teaching | Kleines Sitzungszimmer Chair: Kate Millar 15:30-16:00 Log-in for VEthics – applying e-learning in veterinary ethics C. Dürnberger, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal- Studies, Messerli Research Institute, Austria 16:00-16:30 Filling the gap: teaching human-animal studies in European vet departments P. Fossati, Department of Health, Animal Science and Food Safety, University of the Studies of Milan, Italy 16:30-17:00 Portraying animals to children: the potential, role, and responsibility of picture books J. Benz-Schwarzburg, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal- Studies, Messerli Research Institute, Austria 17:00-18:00 PLENARY SESSION II | Chair: Bernice Bovenkerk

Beyond technocratic management in the food chain – towards a new responsible professionalism in the Anthropocene Vincent Blok, Social Sciences Group, Wageningen

University, the Netherlands

Friday, 15th June 2018

28

FRIDAY, 15th OF JUNE 2018


9:00-10:00 PLENARY SESSION III | Chair: Franck Meijboom

Protecting society: the value of the professional regulatory model Stephen May, Royal Veterinary College, University of

London, United Kingdom


10:30-12:00 PARALLEL SESSION IV

A | Ethics of Production and Consumption | Festsaal Chair: Bernice Bovenkerk 10:30-11:00 Animals as objects: defining what it means to ‘professionally’ treat animals in meat production M.-T. Schlemmer, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal- Studies, Messerli Research Institute, Austria 11:00-11:30 Breeding Blues: an ethical evaluation of the plan to reduce calving difficulties in Danish Blue cattle P. Sandøe, University of Copenhagen, Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Denmark 11:30-12:00 Dual-purpose chickens as alternative to the culling of day-old chicks – the ethical perspective N. Brümmer, Thünen Institute of Market Analysis, Germany B | Sustainable Food Production | Festsaal Erweiterung Chair: Per Sandin 10:30-11:00 On the ethics and sustainability of intensive veal production S. Aerts, Odisee University College, Ethology and Animal Welfare, Belgium 11:00-11:30 Organic animal production – a tool for reducing antibiotic resistance? S. Gunnarsson, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Dept. of Animal Environment and Health, Sweden


29

11:30-12:00 Gene-edited organisms should be assessed for sustainability, ethics and societal impacts A.I. Myhr, Genøk-Centre for Biosafety, SIVA Innovation centre, Norway

B.K. Myskja, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway

C | Veterinary Ethics: In Practice | Großes Sitzungszimmer Chair: Vanessa Ashall 10:30-11:00 Antimicrobial resistance and companion animal medicine: examining constructions of responsibility C. Cartelet, Centre for Applied Bioethics, School of Veterinary Medicine and Science and School of Biosciences, University of Nottingham, United Kingdom 11:00-11:30 What challenges is the veterinary profession facing – an analysis of complaints against veterinarians in Portugal M. Magalhães-Sant’Ana, Ordem dos Médicos Veterinários, Portugal

CIISA, Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária, Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal

11:30-12:00 Clinical ethics support services in veterinary practice S. Springer, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal-Studies, Messerli Research Institute, Austria D | Animal Ethics | Kleines Sitzungszimmer Chair: Herwig Grimm 10:30-11:00 The black box of rodents perceived as pests: on inconsistencies, lack of knowledge and a moral mirror F. Meijboom, Centre for Sustainable Animal Stewardship, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, the Netherlands 11:00-11:30 Effect of farm size and abattoir capacity on carcass and meat quality of slaughter pigs N. Čobanović, University of Belgrade, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Food Hygiene and Technology, Serbia


30

11:30-12:00 Alpine Purity Law (for milk) – New Concept or Utopia E. Schmid, Department Veterinary Public Health Federal Administration County Vorarlberg, Austria 12:00-13:00 Lunch

13:00-15:00 PARALLEL SESSION V

A | Food Ethics | Festsaal Chair: Marcello Di Paola 13:00-13:30 Questioning long-term global food futures studies: a systematic, empirical, and normative approach Y. Saghai, Johns Hopkins University, Berman Institute of Bioethics, USA 13:30-14:00 Four sociotechnical imaginaries for future food systems P.B. Thompson, Michigan State University, Departments of Philosophy and Community Sustainability, USA 14:00-14:30 Ethical perspectives on molecular gastronomy: food for tomorrow or just a food fad? G. Precup, Department of Food Science. University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine, Cluj- Napoca, Romania 14:30-15:00 Identity or solidarity food – ex-ante responsibility as a fair culture approach C. Moyano Fernández, Department of Philosophy, Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB), Spain B | Aquaculture | Festsaal Erweiterung Chair: Matthias Kaiser 13:00-13:30 Aspects of animal welfare in fish husbandry H. Seibel, Gesellschaft für Marine Aquakultur mbH, Germany 13:30-14:00 Recirculation aquaculture systems: sustainable innovations in organic food production? S. Meisch, International Centre for Ethics in the Sciences and Humanities (University of Tuebingen), Germany


31

14:00-14:30 “As close as possible to nature”: possibilities and constraints for organic aquaculture systems T. Potthast, International Centre for Ethics in the Sciences and Humanities, Faculty of Mathematics and Science; University of Tübingen, Germany

Chair for Ethics, Philosophy and History of the Life Sciences, Faculty of Mathematics and Science, University of Tübingen, Germany

C | Ethics of Production and Consumption | Großes Sitzungszimmer Chair: Leire Escajedo San-Epifanio 13:00-13:30 Ethical aspects of the utilization of wild game meat R. Winkelmayer, Austria 13:30-14:00 On-farm slaughter – ethical implications and prospects J. Hultgren, Department of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden 14:00-14:30 Exploring young students attitudes towards a sustainable consumption behaviour D.E. Dumitras, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Romania 14:30-15:00 Tracing trust – on tracking technologies and consumer trust in food production S.G. Carson, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway D | Professional Responsibility in the Food Chain | Kleines Sitzungszimmer Chair: Kerstin Weich 13:00-13:30 Negotiating welfare in daily farm practice – how employees on Danish farms perceive animal welfare I. Anneberg,Department of Animal Science, Aarhus University, Denmark


32

13:30-14:00 How to use theory to elucidate values rather than pigeonhole professionals in agriculture? O. Shortall, Social, Economic and Geographical Sciences, The James Hutton Institute, United Kingdom 14:00-14:30 Richard Haynes and the views of professionals in the animal welfare science community J. Deckers, School of Medical Education, Newcastle University, United Kingdom 14:30-15:00 Modernising the Kenyan dairy sector? C.J. Rademaker, Wageningen University, Social Sciences Group, the Netherlands 15:00-15:30 Coffee Break

15:30-16:00 POSTER SESSION | Festsaal

16:00-17:00 General Assembly EurSafe Members | Festsaal

19:00 Congress Dinner | Senate Chamber, Vienna City

Hall (direction see page 4)

Saturday, 16th June 2018

33

SATURDAY, 16th OF JUNE 2018

10:00-11:00 PLENARY SESSION IV | Chair: Thomas Potthast Should we help wild animals suffering negative impacts from climate change?

Clare Palmer, Department of Philosophy, Texas A&M University, USA


11:30-13:00 PARALLEL SESSION VI

A | Animal Ethics | Festsaal Chair: Judith Benz-Schwarzburg 11:30-12:00 Why insect sentience might not matter very much S. Monsó, Institute of Philosophy, Karl-Franzens- Universität Graz, Austria 12:00-12:30 Animal protection vs species conservation: can the relational approach solve the conundrum? B. Kliesspiess, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal-Studies, Messerli Research Institute, Austria 12:30-13:00 Ethical dilemmas of fertility control in wildlife – the case of white-tailed deer C. Gamborg, Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen, Denmark B | Veterinary Ethics: Methods, Concepts and Theory | Festsaal Erweiterung Chair: Pru Hobson-West 11:30-12:00 Manifold health: the need to specify One Health and the importance of cooperation in (bio)ethics F. Meijboom & J. Nieuwland, Centre for Sustainable Animal Stewardship, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, the Netherlands 12:00-12:30 Being a veterinary patient and moral status: a disentanglement of two normative dimensions E. Thurner, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal-Studies, Messerli Research Institute, Austria

Saturday, 16th June 2018

34

12:30-13:00 Entangled health – reconsidering zoonosis and epidemics in veterinary ethics M. Huth, Unit of Ethics and Human-Animal-Studies, Messerli Research Institute, Austria C | Food Politics: Policy and Legislation | Großes Sitzungszimmer Chair: Orsolya Varga 11:30-12:00 EU Welfare States, food poverty and current food waste policy: reproducing old, inefficient models? L. Escajedo San-Epifanio, Faculty of Labour Relation and Social Work, University of the Basque Country, Department of Constitutional Law and History of Political Thought, Spain 12:00-12:30 The single story about the foodbank L. Pijnenburg, Wageningen University and Research, CPT (philosophy), the Netherlands 12:30-13:00 Things, patents, and genetically modified animals M. Oksanen, Department of Social Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Finland D | Water Ethics and Seafood Ethics | Kleines Sitzungszimmer Chair: Bjørn Kåre Myskja 11:30-12:00 Water ethics – lessons from post-normal science S. Meisch, International Centre for Ethics in the Sciences and Humanities, University of Tuebingen, Germany 12:00-12:30 Seafood Ethics and Value-based Approaches to Marine Resource Management M.E. Lam, Centre for the Study of the Sciences and the Humanities, University of Bergen, Norway 13:00-13:30 Closing | Festsaal

13:30-14:30 Lunch (take-away boxes)

35

POSTERS

1. Food labelling: giving food information to consumers A. Hrković-Porobija, A. Hodžić, N. Hadžimusić, E. Pašić-Juhas, A. Rustempašić and I. Božić

2. Determination of Travnik’s sheep cheese adulteration using

the mPCR-method E. Pašić-Juhas, L.C. Czegledi, A. Hodžić, A. Hrković-Porobija and I. Božić

3. Development and validation of GC-FID method for detection of vegetable oils in dairy products R. Uzunov, Z.H. Musliu, M. Arapceska, E.D. Stojkovic, B.S. Dimzoska, D. Jankuloski, V. Stojkovski and L. Pendovski

4. Sustainable use of agro-industrial wastes for feeding 10 billion people by 2050 L.F. Călinoiu, L. Mitrea, G. Precup, M. Bindea, B. Rusu, K. Szabo, F.V. Dulf, B.E. Stefănescu and D.C. Vodnar

5. Is the consumption of dog s meat ethical and legal? D. Takáčová, J. Kottferová, R. Balajty, L. Bodnárová and A. Packová

6. Sustain or supersede – an exploration of the practices of animal product limiters S.V. Kondrup

7. Moral individualism in veterinary practice – a preliminary investigation into normative foundations in small animal clinics S. Böhm, S. Springer and H. Grimm

8. The influence of dietary preferences of veterinary medicine students on opinions forming in various ethical dilemmas L. Mesarčová, L. Skurková, J. Kottferová, J. Kachnič and A. Demeová

9. Teaching of ethics, animal welfare and concerning legislation in the Slovak veterinary education J. Kottferová, D. Takáčová, L. Mesarčová, L. Skurková, J. Kachnič, B. Pet ková and D. Vajányi

36

10. Food safety and responsible education: a dedicated concept at

the Veterinary Nurse School at the University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna M.H. Scheib, L.N. Buxbaum, Y. Moens

11. Edible insects in food and feed – far from being well

characterized – step 1: a look at allergenicity and ethical aspects I. Pali-Schöll, S. Monsó, P. Meinlschmidt, B. Purschke, G. Hofstetter, L. Einhorn, N. Mothes-Luksch, E. Jensen-Jarolim and H. Jäger

12. Kant on food, physical satisfaction or humanity choice?

Y. Guo

37

ABSTRACTS

The following two abstracts of presentations were not published in the Proceedings. All other presentations are presented by a paper in the Proceedings book.

Alpine Purity Law (for milk) – New Concept or Utopia

E. Schmid Department Veterinary Public Health Federal Administration County Vorarlberg, Landhaus; 6901 Bregenz, Austria; [email protected]

Abstract The Bavarian law of 1516 should ban producing impure beer: the only ingredients allowed for the brewing of beer were barley, hops and water. A story of success for over 500 years. Why not the same for milk produced in the alpine regions? Pure milk from the Alps comes from cows of local adapted dual-purpose breeds with horns, fed with grass and hey only (without concentrates), their calves raised mother bonded and fostered. Each of the three characteristics is correlated to traditional production and regional circular economy, easily recognisable even by lay persons. The key message of pure milk from the Alps reflects to environmental, ecological and ethical considerations. We produce milk using the ressources of the region and with sharing the milk fairly between calf and consumer. There is no simpler authentic position for an unique selling natural product: proud horns, meadow-grazing, succling calves, visible for everyone, checkable at an easy look. Which strategy of implementation could be successful? Another additional label would confuse consumers even more. Better using the strong market position of retailers whose food-policy and philosophy already is on the way “back to the roots” using pictures and selling the feeling of pure nature. Keeping in mind one additional decisive side effect of this system: an integrated limitation of production rate of milk. In comparison to the failure of all administrative or free market approaches for regulation of the milk market, the prevention of overproduction could be the main effect of this concept to the benefit of all.

38

Seafood Ethics and Value-based Approaches to Marine Resource Management Mimi E. Lam1, Matthias Kaiser1, Thomas Potthast2, Sahir Advani3, Tony J. Pitcher3 and Lawrence Ward4

1University of Bergen, Centre for the Study of the Sciences and the Humanities 2University of Tübingen, International Centre for Ethics in the Sciences and Humanities 3University of British Columbia, Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries 4University of British Columbia, Department of Psychology Values are important in all human activities, but are missing in most approaches to sustainable resource management. The explication of diverse stakeholder values and ethics would aid decision-makers in resolving resource conflicts and policy trade-offs. Seafood ethics is the descriptive and normative study of values and pro-social attitudes, value-based trade-offs, and ethical dilemmas of stakeholders and citizens along seafood value chains. It embeds considerations of values and ethics as moral principles into robust ethical deliberation and decision-support tools to promote sustainable ocean governance. Foremost in advancing seafood ethics is the need to identify and analyze the plurality of values and how values interact, in conjunction with ethical principles, to influence decisions along diverse value chains. Going beyond descriptions of values to valuation approaches, i.e., the process of attributing importance to something, can provide context to value decisions and address the gap between values, decision-making, and behaviour. Our approach, explored interactively in a pre-congress workshop on seafood ethics, lays the conceptual and methodological foundation for a transdisciplinary study of values. Individuals rank a set of values, which they relate to scenarios of resource management. We analyze whether types of individuals can be empirically identified from their value rankings or profiles. Next, we examine whether these value profiles and aggregated value landscapes can help to predict individual and community scenario preferences and behaviour, respectively. Finally, we probe the utility of mapping value profiles and landscapes by exploring how values might relate to ethical principles and scenario preferences in marine resource management.

39

PARTICIPANTS

Aerts Stef Odisee University College Belgium Aigner Andreas Messerli Research Institute Austria Anneberg Inger Aarhus University Denmark Ashall Vanessa University of Nottingham United Kingdom Balieva Gergana Trakia University Bulgaria Battaglia Daniela Food and Agriculture Organization of the U.N. Bechtold Sarah Institute Technology-Theology-Natural sciences (TTN) at the Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich Germany Bellina Leonie IZEW, University of Tübingen Germany Benz-Schwarzburg Judith Messerli Research Institute Austria Blok Vincent Wageningen University the Netherlands Böhm Sophia Messerli Research Institute Austria

Bovenkerk Bernice Wageningen University & Research the Netherlands Božic Ivona University of Sarajevo Bosnia and Herzegovina Bruce Donald Edinethics Ltd United Kingdom Brümmer Nanke Thünen Institute of Market Analysis Germany Călinoiu Lavinia Florina University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Romania Camenzind Samuel Messerli Research Institute Austria Carson Siri Norwegian University of Science and Technology Norway Cartelet Clio University of Nottingham United Kingdom Chiu Yu-Chan National Taiwan University Taiwan (R.O.C.) Chloupek Caroline Messerli Research Institute Austria

40

Chun Myung-Sun Seoul National University South Korea Čobanović Nikola University of Belgrade Serbia de Hen Dirk European Society for Agricultral and Food Ethics (EurSafe) Deckers Jan Newcastle University United Kingdom Di Paola Marcello University of Vienna Austria Dumitras Diana University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Romania Dürnberger Christian Messerli Research Institute Austria Edvardsson Bjornberg Karin KTH Royal Institute of Technology Sweden Eggel Matthias Messerli Research Institute Austria Institute for Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich Switzerland Escajedo San-Epifanio Leire University of the Basque Country Spain Fossati Paola University of the Studies of Milan Italy

Gamborg Christian University of Copenhagen Denmark Gjerris Mickey University of Copenhagen Denmark Grimm Herwig Messerli Research Institute Austria Gunnarsson Stefan Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU) Sweden Hanlon Alison University College Dublin Ireland Hansen Tina University of Copenhagen Denmark Harfeld Jes Lynning Aalborg University Denmark Hobson-West Pru University of Nottingham United Kingdom Höfer-Silberbauer Stephanie AMA-Marketing GesmBh Austria Hohlbaum Katharina FU Berlin Germany Huber Annika University of Lincoln United Kingdom University of Bern Switzerland

41

Hultgren Jan Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Sweden Huth Martin Messerli Research Institute Austria Inza-Bartolomé Amaia University of the Basque Country Spain Janssens Monique Erasmus University the Netherlands Kaiser Peter University of Vienna Austria Kallhoff Angela University of Vienna Austria Karg Johanna Messerli Research Institute Austria Kliesspiess Bettina Messerli Research Institute Austria Klinsoda Jutamat Vetmeduni Vienna Austria Kondrup Sara Vincentzen University of Copenhagen Denmark Kottferová Jana University of Veterinary Medicine and Pharmacy in Košice Slovakia

Kristensen Bjørn Oregon State University USA Laursen Danielle Caroline SINTEF Ocean Norway Leyk Wolfgang Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen Germany Magalhães-Sant’Ana Manuel Universidade de Lisboa Portugal Massaeo Alma Italy May Stephen Royal Veterinary College, University of London United Kingdom McGlacken Renelle University of Nottingham United Kingdom Meijboom Franck Utrecht University the Netherlands Meisch Simon University of Tübingen Germany Mesarčová Lydia University of Veterinary Medicine and Pharmacy in Košice Slovakia Millar Kate University of Nottingham United Kingdom

42

Mirwald Lea Tierschutz macht Schule Austria Molavi Aiden Utrecht University the Netherlands Moyano Fernández Cristian Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB) Spain Myhr Anne Ingeborg Genøk-Centre for Biosafety, SIVA Innovation centre Norway Myskja Bjørn Kåre Norwegian University of Science and Technology Norway Nieuwland Joachim Utrecht University the Netherlands Oksanen Markku University of Eastern Finland Finland Oosting Floortje Springer Nature the Netherlands Ophorst Susan Radboud University / Van Hall Larenstein University of Applied Science the Netherlands Palmer Clare Department of Philosophy, Texas A&M University USA

Paulsen Peter Vetmeduni Vienna Austria Pijnenburg Leon Wageningen University and Research the Netherlands Pirscher Frauke Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg Germany Potthast Thomas University of Tübingen Germany Precup Gabriela University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Romania Rademaker Corné Wageningen University the Netherlands Rault Jean-Loup Vetmeduni Vienna Austria Robaey Zoë Delft University of Technology the Netherlands Röcklinsberg Helena Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Sweden Saghai Yashar Johns Hopkins University USA Sandin Per Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Sweden

43

Sandøe Peter University of Copenhagen Denmark Scheib Marie-Helene Vetmeduni Vienna Austria Schlemmer Marie-Theres Messerli Research Institute Austria Schmid Erik Department Veterinary Public Health Federal Administration County Vorarlberg Austria Schörgenhumer Maria University of Vienna Austria Seibel Henrike Gesellschaft für Marine Aquakultur mbH Germany Shortall Orla The James Hutton Institute United Kingdom Siipi Helena University of Turku Finland Springer Svenja Messerli Research Institute Austria Stirn Susanne University of Hamburg Germany Sumner Christine University of British Columbia Canada

Taha Mokhtar Assiut University Egypt Takáčová Daniela University of Veterinary Medicine and Pharmacy in Košice Slovakia Thompson Paul Michigan State University USA Thöne-Reineke Christa FU Berlin Germany Thurner Elena Messerli Research Institute Austria Uzunov Risto Faculty of Veterinary Medicine Macedonia van Asselt Mariska Aeres University of Applied Sciences the Netherlands van Gerwen Maite Utrecht University the Netherlands van Herten Joost Wageningen University and Research the Netherlands Royal Veterinary Association of the Netherlands Vinnari Markus University of Tampere Finland Weich Kerstin Messerli Research Institute Austria

44

Whitfort Amanda The University of Hong Kong Hong Kong

Winkelmayer Rudolf Austria

Zintzsch Anne ICAR3R - Interdisciplinary Centre for 3Rs in Animal Research Germany

Wageningen AcademicWageningen AcademicP u b l i s h e r ssseessbP u b l i s h e r sP u b l i s h e r sP u b l i s h e r s

Documents

EurSafe 2018 Programmheft - Vetmeduni · professional development, assessment methods for professional learning and the inflammatory process associated with various equine diseases