Home
hamburger menu icon

Environmental Ethics

Environmental ethics concern systems of ethics particularly in how they relate to our thinking of the natural world. A key question is what is intrinsically valued, with possible concern on human well-being, conscious animals, whole ecosystems, and other areas.

What is Valued?

Environmental ethics seek to answer the question, What values are we trying to advance in the world? Several answers have been offered. The following are by no means exclusive, nor do many individuals or organizations fall entirely into one category.

Environmental Ethics
Ethical SystemMain ConcearnMajor Advocates
AnthropocentrismWell-being of humansMurdy
Weak AnthropocentrismWell-being of humans and their ethical valuesHargrove
EcocentrismNature, including organisms and ecosystemsLeopold
BiocentrismWell-being of organismsSchweitzer, Taylor
SentiocentrismWell-being of conscious (sentient) organismsSinger
TheocentrismValuation of nature as God's creationHoffman and Sandelands
Biotic EthicsExtended existence of lifeMautner
Environmental PluralismMultiple values are consideredNorton (via Afeissa)

Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.

Ecocentrism was developed in the context of Aldo Leopold's Land Ethic 4 and is a core concept of the deep ecology movement.

A given philosophy may vary considerably in what it values. For example, it is debated within sentiocentrism whether some organisms, say with smaller numbers of neurons, may be less sentient than others (gradualist sentiocentrism) 10. It is also debated whether to ascribe moral standing to (possible) artificial intelligence agents 11, 12 and the ethics of abortion 13.

Theocentric beliefs, also known as Creation Care, are the view that the value of nature is a result of it being created by God. While religion, and Christianity in particular, can provide a basis for valuing nature, it has also been seen as the basis for anthropocentric beliefs 14, especially as expressed in Genesis 1:28,

And God blessed them. And God said to them, 'Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.'.

Under biotic ethics, the primary goal is to extend life itself, not necessarily particular organisms. Such an ethics often calls for expansion into space to spread life as distantly and as far into the future as possible 5.

Approaches to the Environment

Broadly speaking, there are three major approaches to environmental challenges, summarized below 15.

Approaches to Environmentalism
Environmental TraditionMain ConcearnValue System
Mainline EnvironmentalismPollution, global warmingAnthropocentrism
Nature ConservationPreserving habitatsEcocentrism
Animal AdvocacyWell-being of individual organismsBiocentrism or Sentiocentrism

Major approaches to environmentalism are not necessarily mutually exclusive or exhausting, and they fit primarily but not entirely into a single value system. Source: Erdős et al. 15.

Precautionary Principle

The precautionary principle is a principle in environmental ethics and policy that calls for caution and regulation in the face of scientific uncertainty. There are four major planks of the principle 16:

  • taking preventive action in the face of uncertainty,
  • shifting the burden of proof on proponents of an activity,
  • exploring a wide range of alternatives to a possibly harmful action, and
  • increasing public participation in decision making.

The precautionary principle is frequently used in environmental contexts, where there may be a threat of serious or irreversible damage 17. The principle has also been proposed in the context of environmental ethics: when in doubt, it is better to ascribe sentience and rights to organisms 18.

The precautionary principle has been criticized for hiding protectionist motivations 19, for stifling innovation 20, and for being somewhat arbitrary in its application 21.

References

  1. Afeissa, H., Mainguy, G. "The Transformative value of Ecological Pragmatism. An Introduction to the Work of Bryan G. Norton". Sapiens, Surveys and Perspectives Integrating Environment and Society 1(1). November 2008. ↩

  2. Hargrove, E. "Weak Anthropocentrism Intrinsic Value". The Monist 75(2), pp. 183-207. April 1992. ↩

  3. Hoffman, A., Sandelands, L. "Getting Right with Nature: Anthropocentrism, Ecocentrism, and Theocentrism". Organization & Environment 18(2), pp. 141-162. June 2005. ↩

  4. Leopold, A. A Sand County Almanac (Outdoor Essays & Reflections). Ballantine Books; 7th printing edition (December 12, 1986), ISBN-13 : 978-0345345059. 1949. ↩ ↩2

  5. Mautner, M. "Seeding the Universe with Life: Securing Our Cosmological Future". Legacy Books, ISBN-13 : 978-0476003309. January 2000. ↩ ↩2

  6. Murdy, W. H. "Anthropocentrism: A Modern Version". Science 187(4182), pp. 1168-1172. March 1975. ↩

  7. Schweitzer, A. "Civilization and ethics, (His The philosophy of civilization, pt. II)". A. & C. Black. January 1923. ↩

  8. Singer, P. Animal Liberation: The Definitive Classic of the Animal Movement. Harper Perennial Modern Classics; Updated ed. edition (February 24, 2009), ISBN-13 : 978-0061711305. 1975. ↩

  9. Taylor, P. "The Ethics of Respect for Nature". Environmental Ethics 3(3), pp. 197-218. August 1981. ↩

  10. Herrán, M. "How to recognize sentience?". April 2018. ↩

  11. Bostrom, N., Yudkowsky, E. 15 - The ethics of artificial intelligence. The Cambridge Handbook of Artificial Intelligence, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 316–334. 2014. ↩

  12. Tomasik, B. "Do Artificial Reinforcement-Learning Agents Matter Morally?". arXiv preprint arXiv:1410.8233. October 2014. ↩

  13. Dawkins, R. "2014: What Scientific Idea is Ready for Retirement?". Edge. 2014. ↩

  14. Simkins, R. "The Bible and anthropocentrism: putting humans in their place". Dialectical Anthropology 38, pp. 397-413. July 2014. ↩

  15. Erdős, L., Tölgyesi, C., Bátori, Z., Magnes, M., Tolnay, D., Bruers, S. "Three sides of the same coin? The main directions of the environmental movement". Applied Ecology and Environmental Research 15(4), pp. 177-194. January 2017. ↩ ↩2

  16. Kriebel, D., Tickner, J., Epstein, P., Lemons, J., Loechler, E. L., Quinn, M., Schettler, T., Soto, M. "The precautionary principle in environmental science". Environmental Health Perspectives 109(9), pp. 871-876. September 2001. ↩

  17. Harremoës, P., Gee, D., MacGarvin, M., Stirling, A., Keys, J., Wynne, B., Vaz, S. "Late lessons from early warnings: the precautionary principle 1896–2000". © European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, ISBN 92-9167-323-4. January 2002. ↩

  18. Birch, J. "Animal sentience and the precautionary principle". Animal Sentience 16(1). 2017. ↩

  19. Majone, G. "The Precautionary Principle and its Policy Implications". JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 40(1). December 2002. ↩

  20. Holm, S., Harris, J. "Precautionary principle stifles discovery". Nature 400(398). July 1999. ↩

  21. Cross, F. "Paradoxical Perils of the Precautionary Principle". Washington and Lee Law Review 53(3), pp. 851-927. June 1996. ↩