Environmental Ethics: A Very Short Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Attfield
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Environmental Ethics ◽  
Human Population ◽  
Environmental Attitudes ◽  
Environmental Problems ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
Political Movements ◽  
Short Introduction ◽  
Ethical Decisions ◽  
Production And Consumption

Environmental ethics studies the values and principles involved in combating environmental problems such as pollution, loss of species and habitats, and climate change. Environmental Ethics: A Very Short Introduction traces the discipline’s origins and considers how it defends the independent value of living creatures and the need to make decisions informed by the needs and interests of future generations. Exploring the diverse approaches to ethical decisions and judgements, it highlights the importance of making production and consumption sustainable, and of addressing human population levels, together with policies for preserving species, sub-species, and their habitats. It also discusses the different social and political movements involved and considers the environmental attitudes of the world’s religions.

6. Social and political movements

2018 ◽  
pp. 77-90
Author(s):  
Robin Attfield
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Justice ◽  
Environmental Ethics ◽  
Social Ecology ◽  
Environmental Problems ◽  
Deep Ecology ◽  
Social Structures ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
Political Movements ◽  
Human Species ◽  
Human World

Large contributions have been made to environmental ethics by social and political movements, such as Deep Ecology, ecofeminism, Social Ecology, the Environmental Justice Movement, and Green political movements. ‘Social and political movements’ considers these in turn. Social Ecology and the Environmental Justice Movement serve as correctives to Deep Ecology in foregrounding social structures in which environmental problems are often found. But Deep Ecology and ecofeminism serve as counter-correctives to these movements, with their concern for non-human species, habitats, and ecosystems. Green movements (and Deep Ecology too) emphasize our obligations to future generations and to the non-human world. Tensions can arise between environmentalism and liberalism, but they are not always insuperable.

scholarly journals Losing Hope? The Environmental Crisis Today

ANVIL ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin J. Hodson
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Water Supply ◽  
General Public ◽  
Human Population ◽  
Biodiversity Loss ◽  
Environmental Problems ◽  
The State ◽  
Environmental Crisis ◽  
State Of The Environment ◽  
Global Water

Abstract Environmentalists and scientists who study the environment often give a pretty bleak picture of the future. Surveys of secular views on the environment suggest that the general public in the developed West are concerned about the state of the environment. After considering all of the environmental problems that are causing scientists to worry, this paper then concentrates on four: climate change; biodiversity loss; global water supply; and the increase in our human population. Finally we will see what scientists have to say about hope in a time of environmental crisis

Breaking Boundaries as the Clue for Post Ecological Architecture

2015 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-32
Author(s):  
María Jesús González Díaz ◽  
Justo García Navarro
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Ethics ◽  
Environmental Problems ◽  
Time Limit ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
Natural Phenomena ◽  
Know How ◽  
Second Nature ◽  
Remote Locations ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Mega Cities

Ecology shows us not only environmental problems; it shows that we need a new balance and harmony between individuals, beings, communities and all of Nature. We need a new contract with Nature (SERRES, 1991) and new Ethics (GUATTARI, 1990) for our lives. What is therefore new in Architecture? The environmental ethics have given us a universal and supra-generational vision of the management of our Nature and, as a consequence, a new way to construct our “second” nature. What is essential for this new architecture that the new ethics demand? Exploring this subject, the paper firstly analyzes how the relationship between ethics and architecture has been described by other authors. Secondly, how the relationship between mainstream architecture and ecology is evolving, from technical matters to social and more complex issues, to work towards ethics. Finally, the convergence between them (Ethics, Architecture and Nature) could provide the clues to understand the ends and means of eco-architecture. As a result of this analysis, we interpret that there are underlying keys in the post-eco-architecture. These summarize in new roles for the “locus” and the break of habitual limits of architecture, which have been replaced for new ones. There are no limits of scale: macro-structures such as mega-cities, as well as micro-organism are involved in the architectural process. The client of our construction is universal: we do not build only for our client, we must think about all beings, including animals since we know how our decisions may inflict damage to biodiversity. The site has no boundaries: we know how any local actions can have an effect in remote locations of the planet, since natural phenomena are interconnected. There is also no time limit: we must build now, but we must think about future generations.

Future Generations in Environmental Ethics

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Nolt
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Ethics ◽  
Moral Status ◽  
Human Population ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
Temporal Perspective ◽  
Future People ◽  
Intergenerational Ethics

Intergenerational ethics is the study of our responsibilities to future individuals—individuals (human or not) who are not now alive but will be. The term “future” characterizes, not the kind of a thing, but rather the temporal perspective from which it is being described. Future people, as such, therefore differ from us neither intrinsically nor in moral status. Our responsibilities to them are best understood by attempts to see things from their perspective, not from ours. Though intergenerational ethics takes various forms, the credible forms in conjunction with known facts yield two great practical conclusions: we must reduce human population, and we must keep most fossil fuels in the ground. The demandingness of these conclusions is no objection against them, but rather an accurate measure of the moral burdens of our godlike knowledge and power.

Scepticism: A Very Short Introduction

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Duncan Pritchard
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Social Consequences ◽  
Political Movements ◽  
Fake News ◽  
Short Introduction ◽  
Climate Change Denial ◽  
Radical Form

Throughout history, scepticism and the urge to question accepted truths has been a powerful force for change and growth. A healthy amount of scepticism is widely encouraged, but when is such scepticism legitimate and when is it problematic? Scepticism: A Very Short Introduction explores both the advantages of scepticism and how it can have unhelpful social consequences in generating distrust. It considers the role of scepticism as the source of contemporary social and political movements such as climate change denial, post-truth politics, and fake news. It also examines the philosophical arguments for a radical form of scepticism, which maintains that knowledge is impossible.

Why We Need a New Ethic for Animals

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-21
Author(s):  
David Fraser
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Environmental Ethics ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Human Population ◽  
Animal Ethics ◽  
Focus Of Attention ◽  
Meat Production ◽  
Ethical Thought ◽  
Individual Actions ◽  
Communication Towers

Abstract In Western culture, animal ethics has traditionally emphasized acts of deliberate cruelty and, in the twentieth century, institutionalized harms to animals through activities such as meat production and biomedical research. However, with a large human population and technologies that developed mostly during the last century, a new set of harms—unintended and often acting indirectly—now injure and kill vast numbers of animals. Unintended harms arise from human artifacts such as cars, windows and communication towers. Indirect harms occur from disturbances to the balances and processes of nature, for example through pollution, introduction of alien species and climate change. These harms will undoubtedly increase unless they become a focus of attention and mitigation. A new animal ethic is needed to incorporate these harms into ethical thought. It will need to address such issues as responsibility for unintended versus intended harms, and for collective versus individual actions, and it will greatly narrow the gap between animal ethics and environmental ethics.

Reflecting on Sacrifices Made by Past Generations Increases a Sense of Obligation Towards Future Generations

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (7) ◽  
pp. 995-1012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanne M. Watkins ◽  
Geoffrey P. Goodwin
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Moral Obligation ◽  
Environmental Attitudes ◽  
Environmental Concern ◽  
Past Research ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
Domain Specific ◽  
Sense Of Obligation ◽  
Intergenerational Reciprocity

Tackling climate change presents an intergenerational dilemma: People must make sacrifices today, to benefit future generations. What causes people to feel an obligation to benefit future generations? Past research has suggested “intergenerational reciprocity” as a potential driver, but this research is quite domain specific, and it is unknown how well it applies to climate change. We explored a novel means of invoking a sense of intergenerational reciprocity: inducing reflection on the sacrifices made by previous generations. Our studies revealed that such reflection predicts and causes a heightened sense of moral obligation towards future generations, mediated by gratitude. However, there are also some downsides (e.g., feelings of unworthiness), and perceptions of obligation do not substantially affect pro-environmental attitudes or motivations. Thus, while reflecting on past generations’ sacrifices can generate a sense of intergenerational obligation, it is limited in the extent to which it can increase pro-environmental concern.

scholarly journals Environmental Ethics and Environmental Governance for Security in Africa

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 67
Author(s):  
Mark Omorovie Ikeke
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Environmental Ethics ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Environmental Problems ◽  
Environmental Security ◽  
Biotic Community ◽  
Resource Conflicts ◽  
Security Governance ◽  
Critical Hermeneutic ◽  
Legal Frameworks

The paper argues that an important aspect of security is environmental security. Without environmental security every other form of security is impeded. There need to be effective environmental governance if there is to be stable environmental security. The paper equally argues that environmental governance should be based on non-anthropocentric environmental ethics. Environmental governance is here understood to imply bringing human and governmental policies and legal frameworks to bear on the management of environmental resources. All over Africa there are a lot of environmental problems such as resource conflicts, climate change, desertification, deforestation, gas flaring, etc. These problems have to be eradicated for the good of the biotic community. This is why the paper is advocating for non-anthropocentric environmental ethics. The paper uses critical hermeneutic/analytic methods to examine the issues. The paper concludes that environmental governance informed by non-anthropocentric environmental ethics is a quintessential for security of lives/ properties in Africa. Keywords: Environment, ethics, security, governance, environmental ethics, environmental security, environmental governance, and Africa

scholarly journals Watkins & Goodwin Sacrifices 2019 Pre-Print

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanne M Watkins
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Moral Obligation ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Environmental Problems ◽  
Correlation Study ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
Amazon Mechanical Turk ◽  
Limiting Factors ◽  
Moral Concern ◽  
Intergenerational Reciprocity

Environmental problems such as climate change present formidable psychological barriers because they require action now to produce advantageous outcomes many years hence. Accordingly, it is important to understand how to motivate moral concern and a sense of moral obligation towards future generations. Some past research has explored whether encouraging “intergenerational reciprocity” might increase such a sense of obligation. However, this research is limited either in its robustness, or in its direct applicability to general environmental problems such as climate change. In the present research with U.S. residents recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk, we explored a novel means of invoking this sense of intergenerational reciprocity: Asking individuals to reflect on the sacrifices made by previous generations. An initial correlation study showed that perceptions of past generations’ sacrifices correlated with a sense of moral obligation towards future generations. Subsequent experimental studies showed that reflecting on such sacrifices increased a sense of moral obligation towards future generations. A within-paper meta-analysis suggests that the overall effect is Cohen’s d = .352, 95% CIs [0.227, 0.477]. In all studies, this effect was statistically mediated by gratitude. However, this sort of reflection carries a potential downside – it also generates a feeling of being unworthy of past generations’ sacrifices, which suppresses the overall effect on moral obligation. And it is limited in not directly translating into pro-environmental behavioral intentions and attitudes. In sum, the present studies report a novel means of invoking intergenerational reciprocity, while also calling attention to limiting factors that warrant further attention.

Population and Environment

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Cripps
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Ethics ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Human Population ◽  
Technological Development ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
Population Policies ◽  
Key Driver ◽  
Population And Environment ◽  
Individual Human

Human population growth, along with technological development and levels of consumption, is a key driver of our devastating impact on the environment. This must be acknowledged as a matter of urgency. Otherwise, we risk bequeathing future generations a tragic choice between introducing explicitly impermissible coercive population policies, becoming incapable of securing even basic human rights, and worsening climate change and other environmental damage. However, this chapter warns against approaching questions of population from too narrow an environmental ethics viewpoint. If this debate is conducted in isolation from considerations of global justice, there is a real danger of advocating policies that are plausible on the surface but impermissible when assessed in terms of their implicit impact on individual human lives.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document