Advertisement

Moral Responsibility for Environmental Problems—Individual or Institutional?

  • Jessica Nihlén FahlquistEmail author
Open Access
Article
First Online:

Abstract

The actions performed by individuals, as consumers and citizens, have aggregate negative consequences for the environment. The question asked in this paper is to what extent it is reasonable to hold individuals and institutions responsible for environmental problems. A distinction is made between backward-looking and forward-looking responsibility. Previously, individuals were not seen as being responsible for environmental problems, but an idea that is now sometimes implicitly or explicitly embraced in the public debate on environmental problems is that individuals are appropriate targets for blame when they perform actions that are harmful to the environment. This idea is criticized in this paper. It is argued that instead of blaming individuals for performing actions that are not environmentally friendly we should ascribe forward-looking responsibility to individuals, a notion that focuses more on capacity and resources than causation and blameworthiness. Furthermore, it is important to emphasize that a great share of forward-looking responsibility should also be ascribed to institutional agents, primarily governments and corporations. The urge to ascribe forward-looking responsibility to institutional agents is motivated by the efficiency aim of responsibility distributions. Simply put, if responsibility is ascribed to governments and corporations there is a better chance of creating a society in which the opportunities to act in an environmentally friendly way increase.

Keywords

Individual responsibility Environmental problems Ethical consumers Forward-looking responsibility Institutional responsibility 
Download to read the full article text

Notes

Acknowledgment

This research is part of the research program Moral Responsibility in R&D Networks, which is supported by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) under grant number 360-20-160.

Open Access

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

References

  1. Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics The Internet Classics Archive, translated by W.D. Ross http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.html.
  2. Brewer, J., & Trentmann, F. (Eds.) (2006). Consuming cultures, global perspectives: Historical trajectories, transnational changes. Oxford: BergGoogle Scholar
  3. Fischer, J. M., & Ravizza, M. (1993a). Introduction. In J. M. Fischer & M. Ravizza (Eds.), Perspectives on moral responsibility. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Garvey, J. (2008). The ethics of climate change. Right and wrong in a warming world. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  5. Goodin, R. E. (1986). Responsibilities. Philosophical Quarterly, 36, 50–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Green, M. (2005). Institutional responsibility for moral problems. In A. Kuper (Ed.), Global responsibilities who must deliver on human rights?. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. IPCC. (2007). Fourth assessment report Climate change synthesis report http://www.ipcc.ch.
  8. Jacobsen, E., & Dulsrud, A. (2007). Will consumers save the world? the framing of political consumerism. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 20, 469–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jamieson, D. (2007). When utilitarians should be virtue theorists. Utilitas, 19(2), 160–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ladd, J. (1991). Bhopal: An essay on moral responsibility and civic virtue. Journal of Social Philosophy, 32(1), 73–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McKeon, R. (1957). The development and the significance of the concept of responsibility. Revue Internationale de Philosophie, XI(39), 3–32.Google Scholar
  12. Micheletti, M. (2003). Political virtue and shopping: Individuals, consumerism, and collective action. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  13. Miller, D. (2005). Distributing responsibilities. In A. Kuper (Ed.), Global responsibilities. Who must deliver on human rights?. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Nihlén Fahlquist, J. (2006a). Responsibility ascriptions and vision zero. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 38, 1113–1118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Nihlén Fahlquist, J. (2006b). Responsibility ascriptions and public health problems. Who is responsible for obesity and lung cancer? Journal of Public Health, 14, 15–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Paul, E. F., Miller, F. D., & Paul, J. (Eds.) (1999) Responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Richardson, H. S. (1999). Institutionally divided moral responsibility. In E. F. Paul, F. D. Miller & J. Paul (Eds.), Responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Sassatelli, R. (2006). Virtue, responsibility and consumer choice: Framing critical consumerism. In J. Brewer & F. Trentmann (Eds.), Consuming cultures, global perspectives: Historical trajectories transnational changes. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  19. Shue, H. (1988). Mediating duties. Ethics, 98(4), 687–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sinnott-Armstrong, W. (2005). It’s not my fault. In W. Sinnott-Armstrong & R. B. Howarth (Eds.), Perspectives on climate change: Science, economics, politics, ethics. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  21. Strawson P. (1962). Freedom and Resentment. In Proceedings of the British Academy 48. (Reprinted from Perspectives on moral responsibility, in by J. M. Fischer & M. Ravizza, Eds., 1993, Cornell University Press: Ithaca.Google Scholar
  22. Williams, G. (2008). Responsibility as a virtue. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 11(4), 455–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. van de Poel, I., Nihlén Fahlquist, J., de Lima, T., Doorn, N., Royakkers, L., Zwart, S. Fairness and completeness in distributing responsibility : The case of engineering (Submitted).Google Scholar
  24. Young, I. M. (2006). Responsibility and global justice: A social connection model. Social Philosophy and Policy, 23(1), 102–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2008

Open AccessThis is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyDelft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of PhilosophyRoyal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations