Download B - Sristi

B. Fischhoff
Environmental Conservation: Ethical
Concerns
/.
Mil/or Debates on Ethical Systems
Should our environmental responsibility emerge from
the concern for consequences of our action or from the
criteria that we chose to take those actions? There are
several frameworks that have been used such as:
Libertananism. Contractualism. Relativism. Deontology, and Teleology, for analyzing ethical dilemmas.
Bentham (1748-fS32) developed a simple universal
principle for deciding what is good, calling it the
principle of utility. According to this theory, the doer
of any good act tries to maximize the amount of
happiness to the doer and to others affected by it.
Critics have argued that hedonic calculus could not be
the basis of estimating moral worth of an action,
arguing
thai because some pleasures arc inherently better than others
(setting an edueation. say. is better than getting drunk), they
have inherent worth that makes them desirable, it throws in
question that the very possibility of hedonic calculus follows;
it would mean that pleasure and pain arc no longer considered
the basic unit in terms of which the worth of all acts and goals
arc to be measured (Goldberg. 1995. p. 117).
The boundary of feelings of those sentient beings
whose pain affects us becomes part of our moral
boundary.
What are the different ways in which ethical concerns are manifested when describing the environmental problems or prospects? One of the persistent
issues, which emerges in the dialogue on ethics, is the
distinction among facts and values. Goldberg states:
'facts concern the way things actually are. the
evaluations are the judgments about things ideally as
they ought to be" (1995. p.5). Amartya Sen, in a very
significant contribution (1981). observed that what we
choose to describe involves value judgments and how
we choose to describe it also involved a value judgment. The descriptive 'is' becomes the normative
'ought'.
experience pain. Jeremv Bentham (1748-1832) held
that
any being capable of suffering should have his or her
experiences taken into account by utilitarian calculations.
However, according to right theorists, uny version of utilitarianism, no matter how carefully conceived it is. fails to
provide sufficient protection for innocent life, human or nonhuman iPluhar. 190$. p 165i
Pluhar asks.
Do animals have a prima facie right to life or a prima fuck'
right not to be tortured'.' One might hold that some animals
have no serious right but do have a right not to be tortured or
one might hold that that they have a prima facie right to
humane treatment that could be overridden by the need to
preserve allegedly more morally significant lives. (Pluhar
1998. p. 165
But then this argument raises another dilemma,
which is about hierarchy of moral responsibility. Rene
Descartes (1596-1650) proposed 'beings that are not
rational are incapable.of suffering.' According to him.
non-human animals are merely organic machines
without consciousness, unlike humans, who allegedly
are amalgams of material bodies and immaterial minds
(souls). Though he claims that he does not deny that
non-human animals are capable of sensation, he is
denying that they can suffer.
2.2 Responsibility for Conservation Arising out of
Greener Human Purpose
Dower asks.
Should we care for the environment because other life forms
in nature, or nature itself, have a value, moral status
independent of our interests, or because it is in our own
collective interests to protect it? (1998. p. 769)
Determinants of Domain of Responsibility
2.1
Boundary of Pain
Does the degree of pain suffered by other species
determine the boundary of our responsibility? Some
have argued that predation is a rule in nature and thus
why should an anthropomorphic view of nature be
decried so much. But survival of the fittest is also a feature
of a natural system. Will that be acceptable as a basis of
human social evolution? Darwin is believed to have
remarked that humans were not necessarily on the top
of the ecological chain as some higher form than
others. Each organism may have adapted to its niche
and thus may have advantages over other species in
that niche: no single species is higher or lower than
another. Our responsibility for another species may
emerge from the pain we cause to it. The other view, as
we shall see later, is that not every species may
The scope of moral responsibility needs to be
defined and different cultures experiencing tremendous loss of environment are defining it implicitly by
making false compromises between development and
environment. It appears as if one could have the
former without the latter (unless we genuinely believe
that Western societies are indeed more developed than
the rest, as they certainly offer more consumer choices
to their citizens). Human purpose could be to prosper,
without impoverishing other human and non-human
sentient beings, but it could also be defined by various
cultures in negation of certain rights of others. Can
ethics be determined by voting on it? We do not think
so. A great degree of consumerist culture survives in
most democratic European societies and yet its sustainability is questionable. The democratic way of
arriving at the human purpose does not make it more
legitimate and moral.
4603
Environmental Conservation: Ethical Concerns
Human purpose can be defined in minimalist terms.
One cannot solve all environmental problems but one
can certainly solve some. Should one not try to solve a
few because others remain? At the same time, our
concern extends not just to those we know, see, or
recognize. Our responsibility is to society and the
biosphere at large, hence the international agreements
such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992).
2.2.1 Agricultural ethics. The responsibility towards
long-term sustainability of land, biodiversity, and
well-being of animals, has been contrasted with a
desire to intensify agriculture by crossing the natural
barriers among species by using biotechnology or
other technologies. For some, biotechnological tools
can lead to better environment, if these help in re
ducing or eliminating chemical pesticides. However,
these tools can do the opposite by unleashing en
vironmental risks. The biotechnological revolution
involving incorporation of genes from one species
into another has raised a great many ethical issues.
The invocation of the precautionary principle itself
has become contentious. If in doubt, this principle
advises that we err on the side of conservation. Some
have interpreted this to mean that no research need
be done to explore biotechnological alternatives,
even if these were to have the potential for solving
some nutritional and food needs. Others argue that
the issue of hunger is not one of production, but of
distribution. Ethical dilemmas arise when we enable
the hungry to obtain sufficient food (through the
public distribution system) through environmentally
destructive land use practices (such as cultivation on
marginal lands). Whether biotechnology can help
solve this problem is as much an issue of ethics as
one of policy and institutions. For instance, it can
reduce pressure to bring more land under cultivation
by increasing productivity of existing land. Ethical
dilemmas also emerge when:
(a) intellectual property rights are granted over life
forms (such as the Harvard onco-mouse) or other
organisms violating the sanctity of life, as well as
granting monopoly to those who did not and can
not create life (except for modifying it into the
laboratory),
(b) risks are taken in releasing in the environment
genes which, in their natural conditions, did not have
the possibility of diffusing among species (e.g., through
transgenics tolerant to herbicides),
(c) animals are treated with hormones or other
reagents which increase their productivity, yet affect
their well-being or shorten their life cycle, and
(d) solutions are not developed to grow crops in
problem soils, such as alkaline or salt-affected soils,
through biotechnological means.
2.2.2 Asymmetry of rights and responsibilities. Risks
are involved not just when things are changed but
4604
also when they are left unchanged. It is this position
justifying inertia that populist arguments have made
their mainstay. While exploring biodiversity or associated knowledge systems, ethics of extraction assumes asymmetrical rights and responsibilities
(Gupta. 1994, 1995, 1999)" We never acknowledge the
creativity and innovations as well as traditional
knowledge systems of local communities and individuals conserving resources in our writings (the whole
discipline of ethnobiology has been a testimony to
this). We do not share benefits with them fairly,
never share what we have learned from them and
others in their language. The Honey Bee network set
up in 1989 to document and disseminate grassroots
creativity and green innovations is an exception
(http://www.sristi.org/honeybee.html). We complain
when the same communities and individuals are at
times forced to follow environmentally unfriendly
actions. Studies have shown that the regions of high
biodiversity in the tropics are also inhabited by the
poorest people, who have the lowest educational
levels (despite exceptions), who have high emigration
of males and consequently a high proportion of
households headed or managed by women. Yet discourse on environmental ethics has seldom reflected
on these systematic relationships.
2.3 Ecocentrism/Biocentrsm/Deep Ecological
Ethics
The rights of not just .the animate but also the
inanimate, of not just the human but equally other
species, and of not just the born but also the unborn
are articulated in a combination of biocentric, ecocentric. and deep ecological ethical perspectives.
Ecocentric theorists include Kenneth Goodpaster.
Lawrence Johnson, Holmes Rolston, Baird Callicott,
Arnold Leopold, John Rodman, etc., who essentially
argue for moral rights of all beings and ecosystems. A
lake has a personality if endowed with values, in the
same way as mountains and species. Munshi (1952), a
famous writer, in his lecture entitled "A Gospel of
Dirty Hand' tried to link the soil with soul. He did not
see any way we could understand the relationship
between nature and human beings if we did not see the
linkage between nutrient cycle, hydrological cycle, and
local institutions. Of course, he contrasted the ethic in
which nature was held supreme, with the local tribes
who, overawed by nature, remained what some may
call 'primitive.' Other tribes or social groups, which
overpowered nature, vanished into oblivion because
they crossed the limits of nature. He argued for
moderation. Some ecologists argue, however, not just
for moderation but for a hands-off policy. The
recognition of moral status of non-sentient living things can
thus be depicted as the next step in the history of moral
development (Rawles. 199S. p. 276).
Environinental Conservation: Ethical Concerns
Pedersen (1993) distinguishes two strands of modernity drawing from Giddens' work (1990) which may
have a bearing on the evolution of ecocentric ethics.
He refers to separation of space from place and of time
from ecological space. Such a conception of ecological
space does not require cultural association with a
locality. Callicott (1994) hopes that such an international environmental ethic can evolve which can be
compatible with local vernacular cultural traditions
linked to space and time in a very different manner.
The evolution of global time and of global space may
also lead to the emergence of a global social group
without a particular living space or habitat to qualify
for specific environmental value.
Biegart (1999) recalls the contrast of perspectives
between Native Americans and European settlers
about water (surface flow). He gave the example of the
late Philip Deere of Oklahoma, medicine man of the
Muskogee Nation, who termed rivers and streams as
the veins of the world. Clogging them, one could say
would clog not just the life in them but the life of
humans as well. The sacredness of water in all such
cultures indicates that by polluting waters we are also
polluting the spirits that sustain these waters.
2.3.1 Accountability towards perfect strangers and
oilier non-persons. Human needs cannot always take
priority over the needs of nature and other living
beings. How do we determine our accountability
towards the future generation, which is unknown to
us'? The future generation is made up of 'perfect
strangers'—i.e.. who are not known and are unknowable. We do not hear the voice of the unborn.
What should be the responsibility of the present
generation to discern the needs and preferences of
such sentient and non-sentient beings with whom we
are unable to communicate? There needs to be some
response using contemporary as well as traditional
value systems (Gupta 1991).
The cultures of the world have evolved means of
generating and monitoring responsibility towards
other living beings. But this responsibility need not
emanate only from human value systems. Goodpaster
observes.
to be worthy of moral respect. LI unified system need not be
composed of ceils und body tissue: il might be composed of
humans and non-human animals, plants and bacteria.
(Rawlcs. 1998, p. 279).
Johnson argues that 'various beings other than individual organisms can meaningfully be said to have
interests, and that these interests are morally significant.' The beings in question include species and
ecosystems. Brennan critiques this position and suggests that the claim of Goodpaster
rests upon a na'ivc and scientifically outmoded view of
ecosystems and species, neither of which have the characteristics that Johnson has attributed to them.
Brennan disagrees with the claim that
ecosystems have interests, because he takes this claim
presuppose a view of ecosystems as goal-directed that the
scientific community has largelv rejected. (Brennan. in
Rawles 1998. p. 279).
2.4 Socio-psychological Roots of Ethical
Consciousness: The Internal Values
Hill (1978) brings in a personal psychological aspect
while identifying roots of ecological ethics. He adds,
my psychological argument is that truly ethical behavior
originates wholly from the healthy, unhurt, undistressed parts
of individuals; and unethical behavior originates from the
hurt part. If we want people to behave ethically, then we must
provide environments that arc supportive of the healthy part
of individuals (Hill 1992, p. 1 1 ) .
Stone (1987) argues that monist (one best way to
resolve ethical dilemmas) arguments have to be tempered by moral pluralism. The latter implies that one
looks at the ethical basis of not just the action choice,
but also the motivations of the actors and the
institutional context of both the actors and the actions.
There could be other planes as well. Can we not use a
universalistic ethical principle in one part of our life
space and use pluralistic values in other parts? Innovations from the Honey Bee data base on grassroots
innovations managed by the Society for Research and
Initiatives for Sustainable Technologies and Institutions (SRISTI) seem to indicate segmentation of life
space.
The institutional behavior is the one where internal
commands replace external demands. One does a
thing not because one is being supervised but because
that is the right thing to do. Environmental ethics is at
a crossroads. We are looking for new indicators that
will generate internal responsibility for caring for
nature across different cultural contexts and worldviews. But what constitutes nature and what determines whether responsibility for its care globally,
regionally, and locally will invoke equally strong
internal commands: these questions remain open.
Legal and public policy instruments are evolving and
seem to indicate increasing concern for environmental
care. But calls for such concern in the current
geopolitical context from Western countries immediately invites criticism from developing countries.
They see this call from the West as the sign of new
emerging environmental protectionism. They argue
that Western societies accumulated wealth by destroying their environment, which gives rise to a
4605
Environmental Conservation: Ethical Concerns
precipitous argument: that therefore developing societies also need to have the right to accumulate wealth
by destroying their own environment. Moral discourse
will have to take a center stage in each of these
polarized polities.
2.4.1 Environmental perception and cognition. Dunlap
et al. (1993) have provided some of the most striking
evidence against the notion that concern for the
environment stems from 'postmaterialist values'
(Muller-Rommel 1989). In a worldwide survey of
citizen concern for the health of the planet, a high
level of environmental concern was found in developing as well as developed countries. Such a concern
is a necessary condition, though is insufficient for
taking effective action. Stern et al. (1995) looked into
the factors that may influence these environmental
concerns of the citizens. One of the important
findings of the authors is that activation of personal
stable values is possible through organized efforts
which try to influence the values in the direction of
conservation ethic or otherwise. A study done by
Gupta looked at the profile of the green consumers
(Gupta et al. 1997). It revealed four types of consumers: (a) active mobilisers, (b) populist mobilisers,
(c) passive practitioners, and finally, (d) those who
were indolent and indifferent. The fact that there was
not much difference in the proportions for each category indicated the possibility that social values could
gravitate to either side depending on the nature of
effect, available information, and action of organized
interest, would have on internal values.
Austin and Schill (1991) and Boyce (1995) have
argued for taking into account the need for environmental justice while looking at the issues of
environmental care. SRISTI (1993) has argued for the
need to combine ethics, equity, excellence, efficiency,
environment, and education.
Gandhi provided a thoughtful summary of environmental ethics when he said that the world had
enough for everyone's need but not enough for
everyone's greed. The concepts of aparigrah (not
accumulating more than one needs), ahitnxa (nonviolence) and frugality developed by him provided a
practical guide to responsible living.
In the emerging modern consciousness in which a
human being is no more responsible for his or her
individual moral space but for the whole world, Amato
(1982) argues that claims of guilt and gratitude will
ultimately make us humble and bring us into harmony
with our collective destiny. The exploration of environmental ethics is thus a journey into an abyss of
responsibility for self and society, for present and
future generations, and for the human and the nonhuman sentient and non-sentient beings, things,
places, and also for time. We need to extract a slice of
our time from the womb of ever-forinvinsj nature.
4606
which is learning to forget forgiving. That is the real
tragedy and also the challenge.
See a/so: Environmental Cognition, Perception, and
Attitudes; Environmental Justice; Environmentalism:
Philosophical Aspects; Environmental Planning;
Environmental Policy; Environmentalism. Politics of;
Natural Concepts. Psychology of
Bibliography
Amato II J A 1982 Guill ami Prejudice: A Study of The Origins of
Contemporarv Conscience. Greenwood Press. Connecticut,
p.21S
Austin R. Schill M 1991 Black, brown, poor and poisoned:
Minority grassroots cnvironmciHalism and the quest for ccojusticc. Kansas Journal of Lun- and Puhlic Policy 1(1): 69-82
Bicgcrt C 1999 Sacred waters of aquatic and marine biodiversity.
In: Poscy D (cd.) Cultural anil Spiritual Values of Biodiversity,
Inlcrmciliule Technology Publications. UNEP. Nairobi.
Kenya, pp. 402-3
Boycc J K 1995 Equity and the environment, social justice today
as a prerequisite for sustainability for the future. Alternatives
21(1): 12-7
Brennan A 1992 Moral pluralism and the environment. Environmental Values 1: 15-33
Callicott BJ 1980 Animal liberation: A triangular affair.
Environmental Ethics 2: 319-21
Callicott B J 1984 Non-anthropoccntric value theory and
environmental ethics. American Pliilosopltv Ouarterlv
21(19S4):299-309
Callicott BJ 1994 Towards a global environmental ethic. In:
Tucker M. Grim J (cds.) U'orldvien's and Ecology: Religion,
Philosophy, and the Environment. Orbis. Maryknoll (Excerpts
taken from Poscy D (cd.) Cultural and Spiritual Values of
Biodiversity. Intermediate Technology Publications. UK and
UNEP. Nairobi. Kenya, p. 730)
Chambers P 1999 Marine and aquatic biodiversity. In: Poscy D
(cd.) Cultural and Spiritual Values of Biodiversity. United
Nations Environment Programme. Nairobi. Kenya, Chap. 10.
pp. 397-433
Do Young R 1999 Environmental psychology. In: Alexander
D E, Fairbridgc RW (cds.) Encyclopedia of Environmental
Science. Kluwcr Academic Publishers. Hingham. MA
Dower N 1998 Developmental ethics. In: Chad wick R (cd.) Encyclopedia of Applied Ethics. Academic Press.
USA, pp. 767-79
Dunlap R E. Gallup G H. Gallup A M 1993 Of global concern:
Results of the health of the planet survey. Environment
35(Novembcr): 6-15. 33-39
Giddcns A 1990 The Consei/ueiiivs of Modernity. Stanford
University Press. Stanford. CA
Gillon R 1998 Bioethics. overview. In: Chadwick R (cd.)
Encyclopedia of Applied Ethics. Academic Press, pp. 305-17
Goldberg D T 1995 Ethical Theory and Social Issues: Historical
Texts ami Contemporary Readings. Holt. Rinchart and Winston, p. 527
Goodpastcr K E I97S On being morally considerable. Journal of
Philosophy 75: 303-25
Gupta A K 1991 Sustainability through biodiversity: Designing
crucible of culture, creativity and conscience. Presented at the
International Conference on Biodiversity and Conservation held at Danish Parliament. Copenhagen. November 8.
( I IM WP No. 1005. 1992. Ahnudabad)
Environmental Determinism
Gupta A K 1991 Building upon people's ceological knowledge :
Framework for studying culturally embedded CPR institutions. Presented at the 2nd Annual Conference of the
International Association for the Study of Common Property,
Winnipeg. Manitoba. 26-29 September ( I I M WP No.
1004. 1992 Ahnudabad)
Gupta A K 1994 Ethical issues in prospecting biodiversity.
Background paper for evolution of Pew Conservation Scholar
Program Guidelines for ethical issues in exploring biodiversity.
I I M WP No. 1205. Ahmcdabad
Gupta AK 1995 Ethical dilemmas in conservation of biodiversity: Towards developing globally acceptable ethical
guidelines. Etibios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 5: 40-6
Gupta A K 1999 Ethical dilemmas in the conservation of
biodiversity. In: Shantharam S. Montgomery J F (cds.)
Biotcchnologv, Biosafetv, and Biodiversitv: Scientific anil
Ethical Issues for Sustainable Development. Science Publishers,
NH. pp. 93-128
Gupta A K. Shukla S. Darshit S, Pawan M, Muralikrishna S
1997 Consumer response to green market opportunities. Paper
presented at the National Workshop on Organic Food
Products. August 2. ISAM, Ahmcdabad
Mill S 1978 Ecology, ethics and feelings: The re-evaluation of
existing value and the search for absolute values. Proceedings
of the Seventh International Conference on Unity of the Science.
Nov 24-6, Boston. The Cultural Foundation Press. New York,
pp. 593-607
Hill S 1992 Ethics, sustainability and healing. Proceedings of the
Alberta Round Table on Environment and Economy and the
Alberta Environmental Network, EAP Publication, pp. 1-17
Johnson L 1991 A Morally Deep World. Cambridge University
Press. Cambridge. UK
Mullcr-Rommcl F 1989 New Politics in Western Europe: The
Rise and Success of Green Parlies and Alternative Lists.
Wcstvicw Press. Boulder. CO
Munshi K M 1952 A Gospel of Dirty Hand. Ministry of
Broadcasting and Information (Government of India). Publication Division. New Delhi, pp. 21-184
Pcdcrsen P 1993 Nature, religion and identity: A contribution to
the anthropology of knowledge about nature. Paper presented
to the Nordic Research Seminar on Anthropology and Nature.
Faroe Islands. October 28-30, 1993
Pluhar E 1998 Animal rights. In: Chadwick R (cd.) Encyclopedia
of Applied Ethics. Academic Press. Vol. 1. pp. 161-72
Rawlcs K 1998 Bioecntrism. In: Chadwick R(ed.) Encyclopedia
of Applied Etliics. Academic Press, USA. Vol. 1. pp. 275-83
Rolston II I H 1988 Environmental Ethics: Duties to and'Values in
The Natural World. Temple University Press. Philadelphia.
PA. p. 391
Sen A 1981 Description as a choice. Oxford Economic paper,
p. 353-369
Solomon R 1996 A Handbook for Ethics. Harcourt Brace.
New York, p. 146
Society for Research and Initiatives for Sustainable Technologies and Institutions (SRISTI) 1993 Creativity, innovation,
entrcprcneurship and networking at grassroots level: Conserving biodiversity through documentation, experimentation
and value addition in local innovations for development and
diffusion of sustainable technologies and institutions.
Mimco. Ahmcdabad
Stern PC. Dictz T. Kalof L, Guagnano GA 1995 Values,
beliefs, and procnvironmcntal action: Attitude formation
emergent attitude objects. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 25: 18. 1611-36
Stone C D 19S7 Earth anil Other Ethics: The Case for Moral
Pluralism. Harper and Row. New York. p. 280
A. K. Gupta and R. Sinha
Environmental Determinism
Environmental (or geographical) determinism views
the natural environment as the basic factor controlling
human achievement, an environment incorporating
location and the geophysical and biophysical features
native to the earth, including climate, structure,
minerals, soil, flora, and fauna—all that is intrinsically
"earthy" rather than formed or shaped by human
action. Some blur this issue by incorporating humanmodified features, others reduce the rigidities of
'determinism' to 'influences.' strong or slight. Some
trace environmental influences deep within the human
psyche. Environments vary with the objects
'environed.' 'Environmentalism' can also refer to the
search for environmental relationships and efforts to
salvage the ecological system. Contextual awareness is
therefore needed to pluck one theme from a varied
setting, interpreting 'environment' and 'deter minism,' separately and together.
Frequently dismissed as passe, environmental determinism nevertheless touches sensitive and perhaps
unresolved issues—the remote and continuing impact
of nature on humans, human and racial genesis, ethnic
and national origins, conditions that favor or frustrate
economic and intellectual achievement, the global
constraints and opportunities that define all hopes of
present or future accomplishment—perhaps the whole
panorama of human studies, now extending into
biogenetic and biosociological realms.
/.
Prehistory from Hippocrates to Montesquieu
Frequently entangled with astrological or 'cosmic
determinism,' environmental determinism permeated
Chinese, Indian, Babylonian, and Greek philosophy
before the dawn of Western Civilization. By the fourth
century BC. Hippocrates had combined the 'elements'
of earth, air, fire, and water with geographic location
to promote economic and communal health, evaluating swampy hollows and windy uplands accordingly.
Greeks generally perceived their Mediterranean shores
as a 'golden mean' remote from northern winters and
southern heat, a zone favoring moderation, intellectual pursuits, and civil discourse. Open steppes were
fine for savage Scythians, and sun-burned Africans
and Asians were deemed to lack the spirit essential for
4607
Copyright © 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences
ISBN: 0-08-043076-7