Free Essay: Environmental Ethics- Human Needs are more important than Environmental Needs
Environmental ethics is an elaborate concept that has been subject of debate among scholars and environmentalists. This field of ethics theory and practices mainly deals with duties and values with regards to the environment. Environmental ethics essentially involves the concern of the people for the welfare and conservation of the environment. On the other hand, another argument considers the interrelationship between humans, plants and animals as constituting environmental ethics in the entire ecosystem. Environmental ethics entails the human moral responsibility towards the environment. Thus, the environmental ethics that is discussed in this study emphasizes on the importance of environmental needs going beyond those of human beings in totality (Jedidah 43).
In environmental ethics, there are two major issues that have created controversy; anthropocentric and non-anthropocentric. Anthropocentric importance is focused on human needs and also emphasizes on its significance from the judgment of humans. It is of the idea that all moral responsibilities that are enjoyed by human beings are based on other humans, including even those with regards to the environment. Non-anthropocentric value on the other hand, is not pegged on humans, thereby considered to be environmentally oriented.
Environmental needs are of significance to any society because with the availability of a quality environment, productivity is boosted. In other words, a healthy environment ensures quality in the lives of humans which underscores the need for preserving the environment at all costs. Environmental quality, protection and preservation should be emphasized even when human benefits are not put into consideration. Environmental needs are of more importance compared to human needs because they shape the quality of human life, and the latter depends on the former as pointed out by Nemetz (2002, p.38).
Several environmental problems like depletion of resources, changing weather patterns and deforestation have been identified to have impact on future generations more compared to the present. Therefore, humans have an ethical obligation to prevent such from occurring. This is in support of the argument that environmental needs are more important than human needs since by accomplishing this goal, we are able to preserve both the present and future generations, thereby enhancing continuity. However, if we do not take these seriously, we are putting the quality of the environment as well as the health and wellbeing of the present and future generations at risk (Douglas 33).
When it comes to the conservation of the environment with the objective of future generations, many philosophers argue against it because the future generations do not uphold moral consideration in the present. This argument fails to stand ground since the environment that we have today is impacted by human activities that took place decades ago.
Another challenge that has also been identified to hinder the preservation of the environment for future generations is non-identity problem. This argument is inclined to the unknown identity of people who will be in existence in future, thus, we do not owe them any obligation. In fact, there are very few chances that any future generation would raise legitimate claims about being ‘wronged’ by hostile environmental policies adopted by the earlier generations. Based on this argument, it should imperatively be noted that future generations will be interested in the environmental conservation activities that we are involved in at present.
Besides, there is no justification for engaging in destructive environmental policies simply because it is impossible for the future generation to make complains on the same. Trying to attach any irresponsible action to the environment on such grounds is totally not acceptable based on the human needs at present and in the future. Therefore, it is important that we stayed true to our social responsibility and protected our environment (Sideris 11).
The present generation should put into consideration, their actions and the effects that they will have on future generations even though they may not have conclusive evidence of environmental pollution. Humans should also treat other inhabitants of the environment like animals with respect. This should be based on the realization that animals also feel happy with a quality atmospheric way of life just like humans.
This is further emphasized by the fact that animals too have emotions, desires and beliefs. Thus, environmental conservation for human survival should be handled with a holistic approach. It should be noted that, our responsibilities are focuses on achieving the greatest interest satisfaction that can be attained. This is also an important factor in this discussion since animals are part of the environment and their preservation contributes to the actualization of the environmental needs of human beings (Sideris 19).
Pollution of the air, change in climatic conditions, depletion of resources, reduction of biodiversity, deforestation among other acts of such kind exhibit some of the worst impacts on the environment. These impacts are effected by human activities that result from technological advancements, industrialization, economic growth and increase in population. While pollution entails the state of human health, climate change advances the risks of natural habitation. Diminishing resources threaten the living standards of humans (quality of life) while biodiversity reduction reduces the potential medicinal benefits, thereby destroying the beauty and importance of flora and fauna. Since all these threats result from our negligence in protecting the environment, it is our moral obligation to ensure that all the environmental aspects are protected and preserved even though it comes with extreme costs (Prue 2001 p.67)
According to Utilitarianism ethics that are related to environmental conservation, an action should be taken only it is aimed at strictly inducing more happiness compared to any other action. Act Utilitarianism (AU) is a theory which states that the only moral action that humans have the obligation of undertaking is welfare maximization. The theory does not focus on the happiness of one person but welfare of everyone or the community at large. Therefore, the satisfaction of everyone matters in equal measure without exemptions. This clearly points out that this generation and the ones to come should both be treated equally. Hence, there is no doubt that maintenance of a quality environment will help in the maximization of the wellbeing of humans, therefore, according to the theory of AU, we have a moral obligation of doing whatever it takes to ensure that the environment is protected and preserved (Marc 24).
Considering the contributions made by the Kantian ethics, with regards to the principle of humanity which argues that in every action, human beings must be handled as ends and not just means to an end. Kant stresses on human self esteem and respect with regards to environmental conservation. Therefore, Kantian theory suggests that firms that use human labor are not careful about their welfare or quality of life which in this regard should be accorded protection. Human principle is also seen to be in support of the Autonomy principle which argues that everyone has the right of living their lives according to their own views on religion, dignity, moral values among other aspects provided that they are not in violation of the rights of others to act on equal grounds (Prue 93).
With regards to the hierarchy of needs as outlined by Maslow, the basic needs, safety needs, social needs, esteem needs, cognitive needs and aesthetic needs should be achieved because they contribute to the general well being of the society and without which it will be difficult to ensure the happiness of everyone. At a more advanced stage, Maslow introduces the self-actualization needs and transcendence needs that involve assisting others in realizing self-actualization.
These two levels can be attained although it is not compulsory that every human has to get to this level in order to be happy. On the other hand, it cannot be disputed that that the achievement of this level will indeed enhance the total well being of a particular person. This further emphasizes on the importance of environmental protection and preservation for the welfare of humans. All aspects of the environment discussed above have demonstrated their contributions towards enhancing the well being and life of humans.
However, this presents a challenge to business ethics. For example, a business operating in a given society is accorded the freedom of acting in any manner that is consistent to its belief systems provided that it does not go against the rights of other people. This is an insinuation that, even though this business may be impacting the environment negatively, it has a legal ground for continuous operation because it does not threaten the quality of environmental needs of the society. The business has both corporate and social obligation. Hence, it should initiate measures for controlling the level of its pollution through a reduction in its activities or offering compensation to the members of the society who are negatively affected. The reason for this is because ecological needs bear more significance compared to those of human beings. Generally, the environment should be accorded utmost consideration so as to improve human life (Cafaro 16).
Environmental needs are of great importance compared to human needs since it has been established that the existence of human beings and the continuity of their generation highly depends on the environment. Besides, the superiority of the environment controls and determines the quality of the present human life. These factors are considered in ethical economics which stresses on the need for the preservation of the environment in order to attain enhanced quality of life. Therefore, the human society should take the moral responsibility of protecting the environment so as to maximize the welfare of both the present and future generations. However, it should imperatively be noted that human needs are also of equal importance. It would not be ideal to overlook the necessities of humans at the expense and disadvantage of environmental needs. Thus, economic expansion and industrialization are very important because they are instrumental in facilitating human interactions and improving the efficiency of work.
Cafaro, Phillip. Less Is More: Economic Consumption and the Good Life, Philosophy Today, 2008, 42(1): 11-98
Douglas, Moo. Nature in the New Creation: New Testament Eschatology and the Environment, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 2006, 49(3):21-56
Jedediah, Purdy. Our Place in the World: A New Relationship for Environmental Ethics and Law, Duke Law Publication, 2013, 62(4): 2-87
Marc, Lucht. Does Kant have Anything to Teach us about Environmental Ethics? The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 2007, 66(1):23-56
Nemetz, Peter. Sustainable Resource Management: Reality or Illusion? Introduction and Summary, Journal of Business Administration and Policy, 2002, 30(2): 23-127
Prue, Taylor. Heads in the Sand as the Tide Rises: Environmental Ethicsand the Law on Climate Change, UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy, 2001, 19(1): 34-192
Sideris, Lisa. Environmental Ethics, Ecological Theology, and Natural Selection, Colombia University Press. 2003. Print.