Abstract
Sensors, drones, weather satellites and robots are examples of technologies that make farming ‘smart’. In this article we present the results of our review of the literature that concerns the ethical challenges that smart farming raises. Our reading suggests that current ethical discussion about smart farming circles around three themes: (1) data ownership and access, (2) distribution of power and (3) impacts on human life and society. Discussions that fall under these themes have however not yet reached a satisfying conclusion, as there seem to be different ideas at work in the background regarding the purpose and function of digital farms in society. The pros and cons of these rivalling ideas are rarely foregrounded in the discussion. We suggest that future research should focus first on the content of these goals, especially on the content of societal and commercial goals and whether and how they can be combined in differing contexts. This will offer a lead to think about what data ought to be shared with whom, to set preconditions for trust between stakeholders and -eventually- develop appropriate guidelines and codes of conduct for future farming digitalization trajectories.
Generated Summary
This research article examines the ethical implications of smart farming, focusing on the challenges and potential for responsible innovation. The study reviews existing literature to identify ethical questions and areas requiring further research. The methodology involves a review of scholarly literature, policy reports, and articles from popular media and blogs, exploring ethical considerations related to the digitalization of farms. The primary focus is on understanding the ethical dilemmas raised by new technologies in agriculture and to propose directions for future research that will contribute to more responsible innovation in smart farming. The authors aim to analyze the problems that are difficult to solve with available moral concepts in society, thereby identifying questions that demand further investigation. The research is based on the understanding that smart farming is not yet an established field of study, so articles may be published in journals that belong to a variety of disciplines, including law, social sciences, political sciences or information technology. This diversity is considered a strength, allowing the authors to bring together literature from various sources to create an overview over ethical questions that allows for a more systematic ethical study and discussion in the future. The authors acknowledge that their selection may be debated or that they did not succeed in finding all relevant articles, and their work is presented as an exploration rather than a systematic review.
Key Findings & Statistics
- A search of three databases (Web of Science, LexisNexis, and Google Scholar) was conducted in March and April 2018.
- Search terms included ‘smart,’ ‘digital,’ or ‘precision’ combined with ‘farming’ or ‘agriculture,’ and the term ‘ethics.’ ‘Big data’ was also used in combination with ‘farming’ and ‘ethics’ because most technologies in smart farming deal with data.
- The review included articles that mentioned ‘smart,’ ‘digital,’ or ‘precision’ and ‘farming’ (or ‘agriculture’) in combination with ‘ethics’; and used ‘big data’ in combination with ‘farming’ (or agriculture) and ‘ethics.’
- Web of Science: ‘smart farming’ AND ethics: 0 articles, ‘precision farming’ AND ethics: 4 articles, ‘big data’ AND farming AND ethics: 2 articles, ‘digital farming’ AND ethics: 1 article, ‘smart agriculture’ AND ethics: 1 article.
- Google Scholar: Same search-term combinations as web of science: 50 articles.
- LexisNexis: Same search-term combinations as web of science: 116 articles.
- 10,400 hits were found, 50 reviewed.
- The title and abstract of articles found was reviewed by the authors to determine relevance.
- Inclusion was based on whether the article concerned smart farming and contained a reflection or discussion of ethical questions.
- The interpretation of what is ‘ethical’ emerged from descriptions of the authors, meaning that the authors highlighted parts of the text which discuss ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ or the conflict between values or norms and excluded juridical discussions (for example, about copyrights or licensing), political, aesthetic, or business connotations of these terms.
- Ethical approaches to ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ usually deal with perceptions of society that are worth striving for and the ways in which smart farming can (not) contribute to realizing that.
- After selection procedures, the analysis was based on the remaining 44 sources.
- The literature was analyzed and key passages were underlined which appeared to refer to ethical questions and/or contained a reflection on moral concepts and the way they help to provide answers.
- Three interrelated themes emerged from the literature: (i) data ownership, accessibility, sharing and control, (ii) distribution of power and (iii) impacts on human life and society.
- 13 peer-reviewed articles, 5 blogs, and 4 reports were reviewed related to data ownership, accessibility, sharing, and control.
- 15 peer-reviewed articles, and 1 blog were reviewed related to the distribution of power.
- 6 peer reviewed articles, 3 blogs, and 4 reports were reviewed related to impacts on human life and society.
Other Important Findings
- The review reveals that ethical discussions about smart farming currently revolve around three main themes: data ownership and access, distribution of power, and the impact on human life and society.
- The term ‘ownership’ is often unclear when applied to farm data, which is not rivalrous.
- There is concern that large farms can take advantage of the data.
- Authors suggest to use technological protective measures such as data encryption, blocker tags, cryptographic algorithms, identity authentication mechanisms, data flow control policies, data filtering mechanisms, or secure data storing.
- Authors recommend to develop regulation regarding data ownership.
- Authors recommend that societal values should be taken into consideration when the technologies are made for smart farming.
- Data is often seen as ‘business- or trade data, which makes the question ‘who owns the data?’ more relevant.
- Free access to data is not necessarily ‘fair’, as some may benefit from the information while others may not know how to interpret the data.
- Digitalization is expected to cause global power imbalances.
- Some authors expect that a few large corporations (such as, Monsanto, John Deere etc.) will get more power and will even be able to develop a monopoly.
- Digitalization will enforce a ‘productivist model’ of farming.
- The impact of smart farming on the environment is being evaluated.
- The accumulation of digital agricultural data will help to ‘improve the picture on the pressures of industrial agriculture upon the environment’ and eventually contribute to a shared understanding of sustainable farm policy.
- Authors note that insight into data enables farmers to point to their extensive historical crop level data as evidence for the existence of climate change.
- There is disagreement about the sustainability goals of smart farming.
- Ethical concerns and questions are raised depending on the anticipated developments in the power-network.
- The value of smart farming for farmers is under discussion.
- Collaboration to realize common goals is an important theme related to power-distribution.
- In one approach farmers come to depend on large companies, which raises concerns about the equity and just distribution of benefits and the privacy and autonomy of farmers.
- In the other approach, data are not thought to benefit large companies, but the community of farmers.
- The potential loss of traditional farming skills and culture is also under consideration.
Limitations Noted in the Document
- The selection of literature may be debated, and not all relevant articles may have been found.
- The study does not offer a systematic review of the literature.
- Most of the discussion on privacy turns out to be juridical, rather than ethical, which is outside the scope of this review.
- The research is limited to articles published in English.
- The articles, reports and blogs were analyzed and key passages were underlined which appeared to refer to ethical questions and/or contained a reflection on moral concepts and the way they help to provide answers.
- Some of the questions encountered are not unique to farming data, but the exploration was limited just to those.
- Most authors remain normatively uncommittal and simply suggest possibilities for the further development of smart farming without offering arguments for it.
- In the literature we reviewed, most discussants seem to ‘black box’ the interpretation of the data that ATPs and/or service providers carry out.
Conclusion
The ethical challenges surrounding smart farming, as identified in the reviewed literature, revolve around data ownership, power distribution, and societal impacts. Key to a responsible approach is the exploration of the goals that smart farming should serve, fostering a more inclusive dialogue among stakeholders. The current discussions often lack a critical examination of the purposes behind smart farming, with two primary views emerging: farms as independent commercial units versus farms serving societal or global goals. The authors stress the importance of broadening stakeholders’ imagination about the possibilities, so that they can steer technological developments in directions they consider desirable. The study suggests that further research should move beyond the focus on protecting private interests or sharing data publicly, and instead, promote a co-evolution of technology and society in desirable ways. This will require a more in-depth understanding of the values and norms of current collaborations to then reflect on the development of technologies and how to involve more stakeholders. The article also highlights the need for ethical reflection on the interpretation of data, the importance of trust among stakeholders, and the role of codes of conduct and guidelines. The research emphasizes the necessity of a responsible innovation approach that involves end-users in shaping the technological future. The ultimate aim is to increase the likelihood of smart farming being accepted and used by addressing ethical concerns, thus facilitating a more fruitful collaboration.