environmental ethics last test

international justice arguement

• current generations have duty to preserve environment and natural resources for future generations

non-identity problem (Derek parfait)

• raises challenge of how our actions today affect who will exist in the future, making it harder to say we’ve harmed “specific ppl”

moral reasoning utilitarian and rights based approach

• utilitarian: should maximize happiness and well-being over time, including for future ppl

• rights-based approach: future ppl have rights to a livable environment even if they do not yet exist

non-existence argument

we cannot have moral obligations to future generations as they do not currently exist, if they are not present they cannot be harmed or benefited by our actions

ignorance argument

we lack knowledge of preferences, needs and identities of future ppl, so we cannot determine what would benefit or harm them, and we cannot have specific obligations toward them

different people argument

our actions today influence who will exist in the future, since Dif choices lead to existence of Dif Indivs, hard to claim that a particular future person has been harmed/benefited by our current decisions

precautionary principle

if an action or policy has the potential to cause harm to the public or environment, in absence of scientific consensus, the burden of proof falls on those advocating for the action

• strategy to cope w/ possible risks where scientific understanding is not yet complete

ethical egoism and its application to future generations (+ critiques)

normative theory that infers should act in ways that maximize their own self interest

application

• since future indies do not exist, they cannot affect our well-being and so we have no moral obligations to them

• perspective emphasizes immediate benefits over long term consequences, potentially justifying environmental degradation

Critiques

• viewpoint can lead to tragedy of the commons, where individual self interest results in collective harms, including to oneself

• philosopher James rachels argues that ethical egoism is arbitrary and is unjustified with not moral basis

apocalyptic religious perspective on end of the world

• some religions suggest that the world will end imminently through divine intervention, particularly within certain christian interpretations

• belief can lead to environmental apathy, under assumption that the earth is destined for destruction regardless

stewardship ethics religious perspective and its implications

• many religions (christianity, islam, judaism) advocate for stewardship, human responsibility to care for creation

• ex: pope Francis call for urgent action to protect environment, framing it as a moral and spiritual duty

implications

• apocalyptic beliefs can undermine environmental initiatives, stewardship encourage sustainable practices and view environmental care as a form of worship

carrying capacity

max population the environment can sustain indefinitely

malthusian perspective

unchecked population growth leads to resource depletion and ecological collapse

technological optimism

belief that human innovation can overcome resource limitations, allowing for continued population growth

reproductive rights vs environmental impact consideration

balance indiv freedoms w/ collective environmental responsibilities

global inequities consideration

recognizing developed nations consume more resources per capita than developing nations, despite population differences

policy implications consideration

debates over population control measures, education and access to family planning services

overcomsumption

high levels of resource use and waster generation, leading to environmental degradation

consumer culture

societal emphasis on material goods as a measure of success and happiness

ecological footprint

metric assessing environmental impact of an individuals or nations consumption habits

sufficiency principle ethical framework

meet basic needs w/o excess, promote equitable resource distribution

virtue ethics ethical framework

encourage cultivating virtues like moderation and responsibility in consumption choices

justice and fairness ethical framwork

addresses disparities in consumption and their impacts on marginalized communities and future generations

climate change challenge we face

global warming, exrtreme weather, rising sea lvls

biodiversity loss challenge we face

accelerated extinction rates reducing ecological resilience and services

resource depletion challenge we face

overuse of natural resources leading to scarcity and potential conflicts

pollution challenge we face

contamination of air, water, and soil affecting health and ecosytems

moral imperatives when it comes to environmental challenges

1. recognize intrinsic value of nature and non-human life

2. ensure environmental justice for vulnerable populations

3. adopt sustainable practices to preserve the planet

key issue overpopulation

• Puts pressure on land, water, food, and biodiversity.

• Raises ethical concerns about reproduction and family size.

Hardin’s "Lifeboat Ethics": Suggests limits on aid and immigration to protect environmental capacity.

key issue overconsumption

• few affluent people consume far more resources than many poor ppl

• raises questions of global justices and equity

solutions to overconsumption and overpopulation considered

education, empowerment of women, economic development, ethical restraint in consumption

key ethical tension:

balancing reproduction freedom and personal lifestyle choices w/ collective environmental responsibility

demographic transition

shift from high birth and death rates to low birth and death rates as a country develops economically in 4 stages

1. high birth and death rates

2. declining death rates while birth rates remain high

3. declining birth rates

4. both birth and death rates are low and stabilized

helps explain population growth patterns in relation to economic and social development

moral responsibility

• who caused climate change

• who should bear the cost of fixing it

  • rich countries historically contribute more to greenhouse gas emissions, developing nations are more vulnerable to negative impact

justice and fairness

• distributive justice- fair allocation of emissions, costs and adaptation support

• procedural justice- fair decision making processes, especially including vulnerable voices

climate ethics

• avoiding catastrophic harm involves acting w/ precaution

• issues of collective action, everyone’s problem but incentives are weak

techno-fix def

reliance on technological solutions to environmental problems without addressing underlying causes, technology can offer remedies, over dependence may lead to unforeseen consequences or neglect of necessary behavioral and systemic changes

Julian Simon central viewpoint

• elaborated in the ultimate resource

  • human ingenuity is the key driver of progress and that more people mean more problem solvers

  • largely validated overtime

    • poverty plummeted

    • more resource availability

Julian simon

unconventional economist

• known for optimistic views on population growth and resource scarcity

malthusian theory by Thomas Malthus

• population growth will outpace resource growth leading to scarcity and suffering

• Simon rejected this, humans can innovate and adapt in response to constraints

the ultimate resource by simon

• seminal book arguing that human ingenuity is the most valuable resource

• scarcity = innovation, population growth = prosperity

• real prices of resources and food and generally fallen

simon-elrich bet

wager btw Julian Simon and Paul enrich over future price of metals

• enrich predicted price incr due to scarcity

• Simon predicted decr due to innovation

  • Simon won

Simon airline booking solution

Simon proposed auctions to handle overbooked flights, practice now widely adapted

• ex of applying economic reasoning to practical problems

shift in economic thought (toward Simon)

• 2000- most economist disagreed w/ simon

• by 2021, most agreed that growing populations offer more benefits than costs

scarcity and innovation cycle

1. resources grow scarce, prices rise

2. rising prices incentivize conservation, innovation and substitution

3. results in more availability

free market def

economic system w/ no government intervention, prices production and distribution determined by voluntary exchange

capitalist market

private individuals own capital and use markets to generate profit

focus of free market

freedom of exchange and competition

capitalist market focus

ownership of capital and profit motive

free market implications

often ignore environmental harm like pollution because that cost isn’t built into prices

capitalist market implication

exploit natural resources for profit unless checked by regulation or ethical framework

free market goals

efficient exchange, low prices, innovation thru competition

capitalist market goals

accumulation of capital and expansion of wealth by those who own the means of production