“Prevention is better than cure” is a proverb commonly used to highlight how it is better to avoid a problem from the start rather than fixing the damage afterwards. When considering this concept to our approach to the environment, we encounter two schools of thought; Ecocentrism and Technocentrism. Ecocentrism places the ecosystem at the center and stress that we need to limit our natural resource exploitation, so that we can conserve the environment and prevent its destruction. Technocentrism, on the other hand, focuses on technology and science as a way to repair any damage done to the environment rather than changing ethical perspectives on environmental issues. This paper seeks to explore the two ideologies by comparing between Finland and Bhutan; two countries that seem to resemble the two approaches. Finland is considered one of the highly technologically advanced countries, in addition to its reputation for environmental protection. Bhutan is a Himalayan Kingdom that is known for its strong environment conservation and their intriguing approach to sustainable development. The paper compares between the two countries sustainable development approach, environment, and health. It was concluded that, in terms of the environment; Bhutan is doing much better than Finland. Finland’s carbon emissions reduction was mainly because they produce goods in other countries which increase the other countries emissions not Finland. Additionally, high consumption levels in Finland are a major threat to the environment. As for health, there is no extreme difference; however, Bhutan’s health care system is still improving. Yet, the two countries are facing serious issues regarding mental health. Ultimately, the ecocentric approach appears to be much better; especially, in this day and age as many downsides of technology keep unfolding.
Loss and damage from climate change and implicit assumptions of sustainable development
