Advertisement

Ecoethics: Now Central to All Ethics

  • Paul R. EhrlichEmail author
Article

Abstract

A few years ago, I wrote on the need for expansion of the environmental areas of bioethics, and covered some of the topics touched on here. Sadly, although it is possible to find some notable exceptions, bioethics does not provide much of an ethical base for considering human-nature relationships. Here I’m not going to deal with these philosophical issues or others about the nature of ethical decision-making. The rapid worsening of the human predicament means that applied ethical issues with a significant environmental connection (what I call “ecoethics”), must be dealt with without waiting for the more interesting theoretical issues to be resolved. I define ecoethics very broadly to deal with dilemmas over a vast range of scales, and believe they now should penetrate virtually all areas of human activities. Ecoethics must struggle with issues of intra-generational (and interperson/group/nation) equity and the dilemmas of discounting by distance (valuing distant persons/events/costs/benefits less than those closer to the observer in physical or mental distance). Ecoethics also deals with the difficult dilemma of inter-generational equity—of discounting the future. That is especially troublesome when actions today can have significant environmental consequences 50 or more generations from now. Here I would like to highlight the ubiquity of those questions and the importance of seeking answers.

Keywords

Conservation Sustainability Ethics Intrinsic value Public intellectual 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This paper has benefited immensely from thoughtful comments by Kai Chan, Partha Dasgupta, Shamik Dasgupta, Anne Ehrlich, Rob Irvine, Simon Levin, Stuart Pimm, Rob Pringle, Debra Satz, and Kyle Van Houtan. Anne was especially helpful in debating points and editing. I, of course, remain guilty of all sins of omission, commission, or whatever. This work has been supported by funds from the Mertz-Gilmore Foundation and Peter and Helen Bing.

References

  1. Abbott, J. 1974. The employment of women and the reduction of fertility implications for development. World Development 2: 23–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Appel, A. 2008. Economy-US: Where have the bailout billions gone? Inter Press service news agency http://ipsnews.net/print.asp?idnews=45152.
  3. Arrow, K., P. Dasgupta, and K.-G. Mäler. 2001. Some practical steps toward assessing sustainability. Stockholm: Beijer International Institute of Ecological Economics. Discussion Paper.Google Scholar
  4. Arrow, K., et al. 2004. Are we consuming too much? Journal of Economic Perspectives 18: 147–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balint, P.J. 2003. How ethics shape the policy preferences of environmental scientists. Politics and the Life Sciences 22: 14–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Balint, P. and J. Mashinya. 2008. Campfire during Zimbabwe's national crisis: Local impacts and broader implications for community-based wildlife management. Society and Natural Resources 21: 783–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barney, G.O. (ed). 1980. The global 2000 report to the president: Entering the twenty-first century. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office. (reprinted by Penguin Books, New York).Google Scholar
  8. Bearzi, G. 2009. When swordfish conservation biologists eat swordfish. Conservation Biology, (in press).Google Scholar
  9. Brulle, R.J. 1996. Environmental discourse and social movement organizations: A historical and rhetorical perspective on the development of U.S. environmental organization. Sociological Inquiry 66: 58–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brulle, R.J. 2002. Habermas and green political thought: Two roads converging. Environmental Politics 11: 1–20.Google Scholar
  11. Bryant, J., L.B. la Velle, and J. Searle (eds). 2002. Bioethics for scientists. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  12. Butler, C.D. 2008. Environmental change, injustice and sustainability. Bioethical Inquiry 5: 11–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Catton, W.R. 1980. Overshoot: The ecological basis of revolutionary change. Urbana: University of Illinois.Google Scholar
  14. Ceballos, G. and P.R. Ehrlich. 2002. Mammal population losses and the extinction crisis. Science 296: 904–907.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Colander, D. and A. Klamer. 1987. The making of an economist. Journal of Economic Perspectives 1: 95–111.Google Scholar
  16. Cone, J.H. 2003. Theology’s great sin: Silence in the face of white supremacy. In Soul work: Anti-racist theologies in dialogue, ed. M. Bowers-Wheatley and N.P. Jones, 1–15. Boston: Skinner.Google Scholar
  17. Daily, G.C. and P.R. Ehrlich. 1996. Global change and human susceptibility to disease. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 21: 125–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Daily, G.C. and P.A. Matson. 2008. Ecosystem services: From theory to implementation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105: 9455–9456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Daily, G.C., A.H. Ehrlich, and P.R. Ehrlich. 1994. Optimum human population size. Population and Environment 15: 469–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Daly, H.E. and J. Farley. 2004. Ecological economics: Principles and applications. Washington: Island.Google Scholar
  21. Dasgupta, P. 1993a. An inquiry into well-being and destitution. Oxford: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  22. Dasgupta, P. 1993b. The population problem. In Population—the complex reality, ed. F. Graham-Smith, 151–180. Golden: North American.Google Scholar
  23. Dasgupta, P. 2001. Human well-being and the natural environment. Oxford: Oxford University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dasgupta, P. 2005. Regarding optimum population. The Journal of Political Philosophy 13: 414–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dasgupta, P. 2007. Economics: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  26. Donohue, J.J. and S.D. Levitt. 2001. The impact of legalized abortion on crime. Quarterly Journal of Economics 116: 379–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Donohue, J.J. and S.D. Levitt. 2004. Further evidence that legalized abortion lowers crime: A response to Joyce. Journal of Human Resources 39: 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dyson, F. 2008. The question of global warming. New York Review of Books 55: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21494.
  29. Eberstadt, M. 2008. The vindication of Humanae Vitae. First Things August/September: 35–42.Google Scholar
  30. Eckersley, R. 1992. Environmental and political theory: Toward an ecocentric approach. London: University College London.Google Scholar
  31. Ehrlich, P.R. 1994. Energy use and biodiversity loss. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 344: 99–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ehrlich, P.R. 2000. Human natures: Genes, cultures, and the human prospect. Washington: Island.Google Scholar
  33. Ehrlich, P.R. 2003. Bioethics: Are our priorities right? BioScience 53: 1207–1216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ehrlich, P.R. 2004. Values and bioethics. BioScience 54: 484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ehrlich, P.R. 2008. Key issues for attention from ecological economists. Environment and Development Economics 13: 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ehrlich, P.R. and R.W. Holm. 1964. A biological view of race. In The concept of race, ed. A. Montagu, 153–179. New York: Free Press of Glencoe.Google Scholar
  37. Ehrlich, P.R. and S.S. Feldman. 1977. The race bomb: Skin color, prejudice, and intelligence. New York: New York Times.Google Scholar
  38. Ehrlich, P.R. and A.H. Ehrlich. 1981. Extinction: The causes and consequences of the disappearance of species. New York: Random.Google Scholar
  39. Ehrlich, P.R. and A.H. Ehrlich. 1989. Too many rich folks. Populi 16: 20–29.Google Scholar
  40. Ehrlich, P.R. and A.H. Ehrlich. 2005. One with nineveh: Politics, consumption, and the human future (with new afterword). Washington: Island.Google Scholar
  41. Ehrlich, P.R. and D. Kennedy. 2005. Millennium assessment of human behavior: A challenge to scientists. Science 309: 562–563.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Ehrlich, P. and M. Feldman. 2007. Genes, environments, and behaviors. Daedalus 136: 5–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ehrlich, P.R. and L.H. Goulder. 2007. Is current consumption excessive? A general framework and some indications for the U.S. Conservation Biology 21: 1145–1154.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Ehrlich, P.R. and A.H. Ehrlich. 2008. The dominant animal: Human evolution and the environment. Washington: Island.Google Scholar
  45. Ehrlich, P.R., J. Harte, M.A. Harwell, P.H. Raven, C. Sagan, G.M. Woodwell, et al. 1983. Long-term biological consequences of nuclear war. Science 222: 1293–1300.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Engelman, R. 2008. More: Population, nature, and what women want. Washington: Island.Google Scholar
  47. Frost, P.G.H. and I. Bond. 2008. The campfire programme in Zimbabwe: Payments for wildlife services. Ecological Economics 65: 776–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Gelbspan, R. 1997. The heat is on: The high stakes battle over earth's threatened climate. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  49. Gelbspan, R. 2005. Boiling point: How politicians, big oil and coal, journalists, and activists have fueled a climate crisis—and what we can do to avert disaster. New York: Basic.Google Scholar
  50. Habermas, J. 1984. The theory of communicative action, Volume one: Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
  51. Hansen, J., M. Sato, P. Kharecha, D. Beerling, V. Masson-Delmotte, M. Pagani, M. Raymo, D.L. Royer, and J.C. Zachos. 2008. Target atmospheric CO2: Where should humanity aim? The Open Atmospheric Science Journal 2: 217–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Hitchens, C. 2007. God is not great: How religion poisons everything. New York: Warner.Google Scholar
  53. Homer-Dixon, T. 2006. The upside of down: Catastrophe, creativity, and the renewal of civilization. Washington: Island.Google Scholar
  54. Ingwersen, D. 2008. Resurrecting the warty-faced honeyeater. Wingspan 18: 20–23.Google Scholar
  55. Jameton, A. and J. Pierce. 2001. Environment and health 8: Sustainable health care and emerging ethical responsibilities. Canadian Medical Association Journal 164: 365–369.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Jamieson, D. (ed). 1999. Singer and his critics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  57. Jamieson, D. (ed). 2008. Ethics and the environment: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  58. Kavanaugh, J.J. 1967. A modern priest looks at his outdated church. New York: Trident.Google Scholar
  59. Klein, N. 2007. The shock doctrine: The rise of disaster capitalism. New York: Henry Holt.Google Scholar
  60. Le Page, M. 2008. Yes you can, Mr. Obama. New Scientist 200: 20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Leopold, A. 1949. Sand county almanac. New York: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  62. Levin, S. 1999. Fragile dominion. Reading: Perseus.Google Scholar
  63. Lindenmayer, D. 2007. On borrowed time: Australia's environmental crisis. Camberwell: Penguin.Google Scholar
  64. Lomborg, B. 2008. Essay. Wall Street Journal, November 8.Google Scholar
  65. Maguire, L. and J. Justus. 2008. Why intrinsic value is a poor basis for conservation decisions. BioScience 58: 910–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Maslow, A.H. 1943. A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review 50: 370–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. McCord, E.L. 2009. The demise of species: Why should we care. Manuscript: emccord@pitt.edu.
  68. McDonald, P. 2000. Gender equity in theories of fertility transition. Population and Development Review 26: 427–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Meyer, J. 2006. CIA expands use of drones in terror war: “Targeted killing” with missile-firing predators is a way to hit Al Qaeda in remote areas, officials say. Los Angeles Times.Google Scholar
  70. Midgley, M. 1983. Animals and why they matter. Athens: University of Georgia.Google Scholar
  71. Mineau, A. 1999. The making of the Holocaust: Ideology and ethics in the systems perspective. Amsterdam: Editions Rodpi.Google Scholar
  72. Minteer, B.A. and J.P. Collins. 2005. Ecological ethics: Building a new tool kit for ecologists and biodiversity managers. Conservation Biology 19: 1803–1812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Mitchell, K. (ed). 2008. Practicing public scholarship: Experiences and possibilities beyond the academy. Manchester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  74. Mooney, C. 2006. The republican war on science. New York: Basic.Google Scholar
  75. Murtaugh, P. and M. Schlax. 2009. Reproduction and the carbon legacies of individuals. Global Environmental Change 19: 14–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Myers, P., and W. Hessler. 2007. Does the dose make the poison?: Extensive results challenge a core assumption in toxicology. Environmental Health News, 1–6.Google Scholar
  77. Myrskylä, M., H.-P. Kohler, and F.C. Billari. 2009. Advances in development reverse fertility declines. Nature 460: 741–743.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Naess, A. 1973. The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement: A summary. Inquiry 16: 95–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. National Academy of Sciences USA. 1993. A joint statement by fifty-eight of the world's scientific academies. Population summit of the world’s scientific academies. New Delhi, India: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  80. Ornstein, R. and P. Ehrlich. 1989. New world/new mind: Moving toward conscious evolution. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  81. Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  82. Pearson, Y.E. 2007. Storks, cabbage patches, and the right to procreate. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 4: 105–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Pirages, D.C. and T.M. DeGeest. 2003. Ecological security: An evolutionary perspective on globalization. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  84. Potter, V.R. 1999. Fragmented ethics and “bridge bioethics”. The Hastings Center Report 29: 38–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Potter, V.R. and P.J. Whitehouse. 1998. Deep and global bioethics of a liveable third millennium. The Scientist 12: 9.Google Scholar
  86. Pringle, R.M. 2008. Elephants as agents of habitat creation for small vertebrates at the patch scale. Ecology 89: 26–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Recher, H.F., D. Lunney, and I. Dunn. 1986. A natural legacy: Ecology in Australia, 2nd ed. Sydney: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  88. Reeves, R.R. 2002. The origins and character of ‘aboriginal subsistence’ whaling: A global review. Mammal Review 32: 71–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Rolston, H. 1988. Environmental ethics: Duties to and values in the natural world. Philadelphia: Temple University.Google Scholar
  90. Shockley, W. 1972. Dysgenics, geneticity, raceology: A challenge to the intellectual responsibility of educators. Phi Delta Kappan 53: 297–307.Google Scholar
  91. Singer, P. 1993. Practical ethics, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  92. Singer, P. 2009. The life you can save. Melbourne: Text.Google Scholar
  93. Smith, M. and R. Duffy. 2003. The ethics of tourism development. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  94. Solomon, S., G.-K. Plattner, R. Knuttic, and P. Friedlingsteind. 2009. Irreversible climate change due to carbon dioxide emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106: 1704–1709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Spash, C.L. 2007. Deliberative monetary valuation (DMV): Issues in combining economic and political processes to value environmental change. Ecological Economics 63: 690–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Sterman, J.D. 2008. Risk communication on climate: Mental models and mass balance. Science 322: 532–533.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Stone, C.D. 1974. Should trees have standing? Towards legal rights for natural objects. Los Altos: Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  98. Thakurta, P.G. 2008. Trade-India: Rare unity against west’s farm subsidies. Inter press service news agency, http://ipsnews.net/print.asp?idnews=34116.
  99. Tierney, J. 1990. Betting the planet. New York Times Magazine, December 2.Google Scholar
  100. Toon, O., A. Robock, R.P. Turco, C. Bardeen, L. Oman, and G. Stenchikov. 2007. Consequences of regional-scale nuclear conflicts. Science 315: 1224–1225.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. Toulmin, S. 1958. The uses of arguments. Cambridge: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  102. Turner, L. 2009. Anthropological and sociological critiques of bioethics. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 6: 83–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Union of Concerned Scientists. 1993. World scientists’ warning to humanity. Cambridge: Union of Concerned Scientists.Google Scholar
  104. Van Houtan, K.S. and S.L. Pimm. 2006. The Christian ethics of species conservation. In Religion and the new ecology: Environmental prudence in a world in flux, ed. D.M. Lodge and C. Hamlin, 116–147. South Bend: University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
  105. Wallerstein, I., C. Juma, E.F. Keller, J. Kocka, and D. Lecourt. 1996. Open the social sciences: Report of the Gulbenkian commission on the restructuring of the social sciences. Stanford: Stanford University.Google Scholar
  106. Whitehouse, P.J. 1999. The ecomedical disconnect syndrome. The Hastings Center Report 29: 41–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. Will, G. 2009. Dark green doomsayers. Washington Post, February 15.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  2. 2.Center for Conservation BiologyStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations