Food sovereignty in the intersection between bioethics and human rights: an integrative review of literatura

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1344/rbd2018.1.19395

Keywords:

food security, food sovereignty, bioethics, human rights, integrative review

Abstract

The concept of food sovereignty is based on the attempt to counteract the food production’s system, led by large companies, which withdraw the autonomy of people to decide on their food actions. An integrative review of literature was conducted with a guiding question oriented by bioethics, through the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. The search on the database was made with the descriptors "sovereignty" and "food", resulting in 21 articles for full reading. They were compiled in three categories: [I] Aspects of the environment, [II] Human Rights and [III] Political-economic aspects. The analysis has shown that the concentrations of land, means of production, and capital, have brought consequences for the iniquities of populations and their health, without regard to the sustainability and survival of the planet.

Author Biographies

Ricardo de Amorim Cini, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná

Mestrando do Programa de Pós Graduação em Bioética da Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná. Tecnólogo em Gastronomia.

Caroline Filla Rosaneli, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná (PUCPR)

Docente do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Bioética da Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná. Nutricionista, Mestre em Alimentos e Nutrição e Doutora em Ciências da Saúde.

Thiago Rocha da Cunha, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná (PUCPR)

Docente do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Bioética da Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná. Doutor e Mestre em Bioética pela Universidade de Brasília.

Published

2018-02-19

How to Cite

Cini, R. de A., Rosaneli, C. F., & Cunha, T. R. da. (2018). Food sovereignty in the intersection between bioethics and human rights: an integrative review of literatura. Revista De Bioética Y Derecho, (42), 51–69. https://doi.org/10.1344/rbd2018.1.19395