write an essay on environmental ethics

• Net Zero Features
• Conscious Living Essentials
• Geothermal Energy Installers
• Planet Earth
• Climate Policy
• Sustainability

Environmental Ethics: What it Is and Why it Matters

We are reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn affiliate commission.

An anthropogenic approach — human first — to utilizing resources repeatedly leads to ecological degradation and loss of biodiversity. Conversely, ensuring the conservation of nature allows everyone and everything to flourish. 

Environmental ethics — what we believe and how we behave toward the planet — determines its survivability or collapse. By altering views for a planet-first attitude, humanity ensures the availability of essential resources for current and future generations. 

This article will define environmental ethics and explain its importance before describing ways to adopt an ecologically-ethical lifestyle.

What Is Environmental Ethics?

Applying ethics — a standard of conduct — to the environment helps to differentiate right or wrong behaviors. For example, an aquarium focuses on animal welfare and educating the public about marine species. Many aquariums also house endangered species we might lose in the wild. 

About 183 million Americans visit aquariums and zoos annually to learn about their favorite sea creatures. Although some argue that aquariums are crucial for conservation and education, others declare all species should be free. 

Individual morals and attitudes toward the environment determine what is right or wrong. How we utilize the Earth’s land and natural resources pertains to these attitudes.

Why Is Environmental Ethics Important?

Environmental ethics is the moral ground on which we protect the planet. Some would call it “ecological consciousness” — a means of living sustainably and harmoniously with nature. When we lack a sense of morals and ethics, we pollute, knowingly harm or kill endangered wildlife and overconsume resources.

The term “deep ecology” has become a core facet of environmental ethics — the idea that people must radically alter their relationship with nature by giving it intrinsic value. Nature’s intrinsic or inherent value means it holds significance outside of human usefulness — the aesthetic of a pristine environment is equally or more important than cutting down a forest to meet human needs.

Upholding environmental ethics enables the social framework of protecting the Earth. Viewing the Earth with a moral sense allows us to visualize solutions for some of the worst ecological issues. Therefore, personal convictions of nature’s proper treatment could significantly affect widespread behaviors.

The Principles of Environmental Ethics

There are several principles of environmental ethics. However, they play into the idea that humans are one with nature — when the planet suffers, so do people. Overall, ecological ethics pertains to the following tenets:

• There is a limited supply of natural resources
• We must share resources with everyone, including future generations
• Humans are responsible for protecting natural resources
• People and nature are intrinsically the same
• Economic growth is not sustainable — often, it drives environmental degradation
• Natural laws impact humans
• We succeed by cooperating with the planet

These principles shape environmental reform, social movements and personal convictions to uphold environmental integrity. 

Environmental Ethics in Action

Doing the right thing can be challenging. Sometimes it demands sacrificing life’s comforts for the vitality of our planet. As a steward, you can turn your ecological values into actions that improve the world, wildlife and resources for future generations. Here are 10 ways you can make a difference.

1. Protecting Animals

The International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List includes over 150,300 species — 42,100 are endangered and threatened with extinction. Additionally, there are 100 million internationally traded animals annually. 

While conservation nonprofits work tirelessly to conserve these species from climate change, poaching and habitat loss, it is equally essential for you to do your part. Restore backyard habitats, buy cruelty-free products and donate to legitimate wildlife organizations.

2. Farming Sustainably

Sustainable agriculture is a farming method that adheres to environmental protection. When farming sustainably, you ensure future generations have access to nutritious and adequate food. Farmers who adopt green farming practices look for ways to reduce water and energy consumption, preserve soil, avoid pesticides and conserve wildlife.

3. Conserving Water

Water is a common pool resource shared by all, so we must conserve it as much as possible. Nearly 68% of freshwater is locked up in polar glaciers and ice caps, while 30% is groundwater. However, only a tiny fraction is available for human consumption. Participate in clean-up efforts and eliminate chemical use to avoid contaminating water resources.

4. Green Living

Your decision to live sustainably is an important component of environmental ethics. If you want to protect the planet, you must make eco-friendly changes. Even minor acts — such as switching to plant-based diets or shopping for green products — make a difference. You might also opt to ride your bike places instead of driving to decrease emissions.

5. Reducing Plastic Pollution

The world generated 390.7 million metric tons of plastic — a 4% year-over-year increase. Much of this plastic waste bypasses landfills and recycling facilities, ending up in the ocean. As a result, marine life becomes threatened, injured and killed. Start using reusable water bottles, shopping bags and straws to reduce plastic pollution. You should also look for biodegradable products and learn how to recycle products properly.

6. Buying Local Goods

Before going to the supermarket, visit your local farmers market or farmstand instead. Buying local produce and goods reduce transportation emissions and supports local growers. Often, local foods come from organic farms that do not use pesticides and other synthetic chemicals. Farm-to-table produce also helps eliminate waste.

7. Volunteering

Putting environmental ethics into action could look like volunteer work. Do you live near a park or beach? There may be a local clean-up event you can participate in. Some communities invite people to plant trees, particularly in urban areas. Volunteering is giving back to the planet. 

8. Recycling

Nearly 62% of Americans don’t know how to recycle correctly — this causes many not to altogether. Learn what you can about recycling items and make it a habit. Recycling reduces landfill waste and leakage into ecosystems. Additionally, you can compost leftover food scraps for healthy soil for your garden. 

9. Limiting Energy Consumption

Make a conscious effort to reduce energy consumption at home and work. Turn off lights when you leave a room, unplug devices and purchase a programmable thermostat. Maintaining an energy-efficient home will take effort, but it is the right thing to do for climate change.

10. Supporting Green Businesses and Organizations

Many businesses have committed to being eco-friendly, from their supply chain to manufacturing to distribution of goods. Supporting green companies and organizations over brands that aren’t is a choice that makes or breaks sustainability. You do right by the environment — and progress green businesses — when you opt for sustainable brands.

Environmental Ethics Are Integral to a Healthy Planet

When we uphold our values for Earth, we make more ecologically sound decisions to protect it. Environmental ethics are critical for a healthy planet and resource conservation for future generations. 

Thanks for subscribing! Please check your email for further instructions.

Like what you read? Join other Environment.co readers!

Get the latest updates on our planet by subscribing to the Environment.co newsletter!

About the author

8 Homesteading Equipment to Prioritize for Sustainable Off-Grid Living

15 Fall Lawn Care Tools and Tips Even a Scarecrow Could Use

11 Things To Know About Before Getting Chickens as Pets

Composting for Beginners: The Only Guide You Need for Gardening Gold

Common Mistakes in Sheep Breeding and How To Avoid Them

Sweeping Up Appearances: Chimney Cleaning Frequency, Tools, and Strategies

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center

• What is ethics?
• How is ethics different from morality?
• Why does ethics matter?
• Is ethics a social science?

environmental ethics

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

environmental ethics , a field of applied ethics concerned with the natural environment , including its instrumental value for human beings and other animals and its possible intrinsic value.

(Read Peter Singer’s Britannica entry on ethics.)

Environmental issues raise a host of difficult ethical questions, including the ancient question of the nature of intrinsic value. Whereas many philosophers in the past have agreed that human experiences have intrinsic value—and utilitarians at least have always accepted that the pleasures and pains of nonhuman animals are of some intrinsic significance—this does not show why it is so bad if, for example, dodoes become extinct or a rainforest is cut down. Are these things to be regretted only because of the experiences that would be lost to humans or other sentient beings? Or is there more to it than that? From the late 20th century, some philosophers defended the view that trees, rivers, species (considered apart from the individual organisms of which they consist), and perhaps even ecosystems as a whole have a value independent of the instrumental value they may have for humans or nonhuman animals. There is, however, no agreement on what the basis for this value should be.

Concern for the environment also raises the question of obligations to future generations. How much do human beings living now owe to those not yet born? For those who hold an ethics based on social contract theory (i.e., an ethics that grounds moral rights and duties in a hypothetical agreement with other members of society) or for ethical egoists (i.e., those who hold that morally correct actions are those that advance or protect one’s self-interest), the answer would seem to be: nothing. Although humans existing in the present can act in ways that benefit humans existing in the future, the latter are unable to reciprocate . Most other ethical theories, however, do give some weight to the interests of future generations. Utilitarians, for example, would not think that the fact that members of future generations do not yet exist is any reason for giving less consideration to their interests than to the interests of present generations—provided that one can be certain that future generations will exist and will have interests that will be affected by what one does. In the case of, say, the storage of radioactive waste or the emission of gases that contribute to climate change , it seems clear that what present generations do will indeed affect the interests of generations to come. Most philosophers agree that these are important moral issues. Climate change in particular has been conceived of as a question of global equity: how much of a scarce resource (the capacity of the atmosphere to safely absorb waste gases produced by human activity) may each country use? Are industrialized countries justified in using far more of this resource, on a per capita basis, than developing countries, considering that the human costs of climate change will fall more heavily on developing countries because they cannot afford the measures needed to mitigate them?

These questions become even more complex when one considers that the size of future generations can be affected by government population policies and by other less-formal attitudes toward population growth and family size. The notion of overpopulation conceals a philosophical issue that was ingeniously explored in  Reasons and Persons (1984), by the British philosopher Derek Parfit . What is optimum population? Is it the population size at which the average level of welfare will be as high as possible? Or is it the size at which the total amount of welfare is as great as possible? There were decisive objections to the average view, but the total view also had  counterintuitive  consequences. The total view entails that a vastly overpopulated world, one in which the average level of welfare is so low as to make life barely worth living, is morally preferable to a less-populated world in which the average level of welfare is high, provided that the number of people in the overpopulated world is so great as to make the total amount of welfare in that world greater than in the less-populated world. Parfit referred to this implication as the “Repugnant Conclusion.” Much thought was given to finding  alternatives  that did not carry the counterintuitive consequences of the average and total views. But the alternatives suggested had their own difficulties, and the question remained one of the most baffling conundrums in applied ethics. ( See also   environmentalism .)

Essay on Environmental Ethics

Students are often asked to write an essay on Environmental Ethics in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Environmental Ethics

Understanding environmental ethics.

Environmental Ethics is a branch of philosophy that explores the moral relationship between humans and the environment. It asks how we should treat the environment and the creatures that live in it.

Why is it Important?

Environmental Ethics is important because it helps us understand the value of nature. It teaches us to respect all forms of life, not just human life. This perspective is crucial for the survival of our planet.

Our Responsibilities

We have a responsibility to protect the environment. This includes not polluting, reducing waste, and conserving resources. By practicing Environmental Ethics, we can help ensure a healthy future for our planet.

250 Words Essay on Environmental Ethics

Introduction.

Environmental ethics is an integral part of environmental philosophy that extends the traditional boundaries of ethics from solely including humans to the non-human world. It exerts moral responsibility on the human activities towards the environment and seeks to provide a moral footing for the cause of environmental protection.

The Emergence of Environmental Ethics

The importance of environmental ethics.

Environmental ethics is essential in guiding human actions towards the environment. It provides a framework for understanding the relationships between humans and the environment, and it guides our decisions and actions in terms of their potential impacts on the environment.

Challenges and Future Perspectives

The main challenge in environmental ethics is the anthropocentric view that humans are the center of moral concern. This view neglects the intrinsic value of non-human entities in the environment. A shift towards a more eco-centric perspective, which values all life forms and their roles in the ecosystem, is needed.

In conclusion, environmental ethics is a crucial philosophical field that guides our interactions with the natural world. It promotes respect for all life forms and encourages sustainable practices to ensure the well-being of our planet for future generations.

500 Words Essay on Environmental Ethics

Introduction to environmental ethics.

Environmental Ethics is a branch of philosophy that explores the moral relationship between humans and the environment. It questions the moral obligations that human beings have towards the environment and its non-human elements. This discipline has gained significant traction in recent decades due to the escalating environmental crises, such as climate change, deforestation, and biodiversity loss.

The Need for Environmental Ethics

The Anthropocene epoch, characterized by human-induced changes to the Earth’s ecosystems, underscores the urgent need for Environmental Ethics. We are living in an era where human activities are causing unprecedented environmental destruction. The conventional anthropocentric ethical frameworks, which prioritize human interests, have proven inadequate in addressing these crises. Thus, there is a pressing need for a new ethical paradigm that values and respects non-human entities in their own right.

Biocentric and Ecocentric Approaches

Ecocentrism, on the other hand, extends moral consideration to ecosystems as a whole, including their abiotic components. This perspective recognizes the intrinsic value of all elements of an ecosystem, from its smallest microorganisms to its largest landforms. It emphasizes the interconnectedness of all life forms and their environments, advocating for a holistic approach to environmental stewardship.

Implications for Environmental Policy and Practice

Environmental Ethics has profound implications for environmental policy and practice. It challenges us to rethink our relationship with nature and to develop more sustainable ways of living. For instance, it can guide policymakers in crafting laws that protect endangered species, preserve biodiversity, and mitigate climate change. In business, it can inspire the adoption of sustainable practices that minimize environmental harm and promote ecological health.

Challenges and Future Directions

Nevertheless, as we move deeper into the Anthropocene, the relevance of Environmental Ethics is set to grow. It provides us with a philosophical foundation for a more sustainable and equitable relationship with our environment. Future research in this field could explore how to operationalize these ethical principles in different contexts, from local communities to multinational corporations and international policy forums.

In conclusion, Environmental Ethics offers a powerful lens through which to understand and address the environmental challenges of our time. By broadening our moral horizons to include non-human entities, it holds the potential to transform our relationship with the environment for the better.

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

10.2 Environmental Ethics

Learning objectives.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Explain the current environmental and climate crisis.
• Describe different philosophical positions pertaining to humanity’s relationships to the natural environment.
• Identify the circumstances that have led to marginalized groups being especially affected by climate disasters.

Before environmental ethics emerged as an academic discipline in the 1970s, some people were already questioning and rethinking our relationship to the natural world. Aldo Leopold ’s A Sand County Almanac , published in 1949, called upon humanity to expand our idea of community to include the entire natural world, grounding this approach in the belief that all of nature is connected and interdependent in important ways. Rachel Carson ’s Silent Spring (1962) drew attention to the dangers of what were then commonly used commercial pesticides. Carson’s essays drew attention to the far-reaching impacts of human activity and its potential to cause significant harm to the environment and to humanity in turn. These early works inspired the environmentalist movement and sparked debates about how to deal with emerging environmental challenges.

The Emerging Crisis

Humans directly and indirectly change and shape the natural world. Our reliance on fossil fuels to meet our energy needs, for example, releases a key greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), into the air as a result. Greenhouse gases trap heat in Earth’s atmosphere, resulting in changes in the planet’s climate. The two countries that produce the most CO 2 are the United States and China. The United States is the biggest gasoline consumer in the world, using approximately 338 million gallons of gasoline per day. China is the biggest coal consumer, burning approximately three billion tons of coal in 2020—more than half of the worldwide total consumption of coal. Our demand for the energy provided by fossil fuels to power our industries, heat our homes, and make possible travel between distant locations is the main factor that has contributed to increased levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Human activities have had and continue to have significant impacts on the natural world. The term anthropogenic climate change refers to changes in Earth’s climate caused or influenced by human activity. Severe weather and natural disasters are increasing in frequency and intensity because of the changing climate. As just one example, record-setting wildfires were experienced in recent years in both the United States and Australia. In a span of just five years (2017–2021), the United States experienced four of the most severe and deadliest wildfires in its history, all of which occurred in California: the 2017 Tubbs Fire, the 2018 Camp Fire, the 2020 Bay Area Fire, and the 2021 Dixie Fire. In 2020, Australia experienced its most catastrophic bushfire season when roughly 19 million hectares burned, destroying over three thousand homes and killing approximately 1.25 billion animals.

Environmental ethics is an area of applied ethics that attempts to identify right conduct in our relationship with the nonhuman world. For decades, scientists have expressed concern about the short- and long-term effects that human activities are having on the climate and Earth’s ecosystems. Many philosophers argue that in order to change our behaviors in ways that result in healing of the natural world, we need to change our thinking about the agency and value of the nonhuman elements (including plants, animals, and even entities such as rivers and mountains) that share the globe with us.

Political and Legal Dimensions

The environmental movement began with specific worries about air and water pollution and the effects of pesticides on food crops. Rachel Carson ’s Silent Spring was influential in the creation of nonprofit organizations and government agencies, such as the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), designed to protect human health and the environment. Agencies like the EPA can significantly affect national policy and aspects of the economy related to emissions from factories, use of and disposal of toxic chemicals, and nearly anything else that can adversely impact the environment or human health.

Legal approaches to protecting the environment vary from country to country. The economic drive to produce quickly and efficiently with little to no regulation pits many industrializing countries against the more established economies in Western Europe and North America. China, for example, which currently contributes 43 percent of the world’s annual carbon emissions, is attempting to enact policies that extend beyond mere cleanup to foster regeneration of ecological systems (Gardner 2019). With unaddressed environmental concerns, China is currently facing a loss of financial and intellectual capital as 60 percent of citizens with a net worth of $1.5 million or more have emigrated.

International efforts to address the climate crisis have met with mixed success. In 1985, after scientists discovered that some aerosol sprays were causing holes in the ozone layer in the atmosphere, 20 countries initiated the Montreal Protocol, which banned the use of these sprays. The international community rapidly adopted the agreement, and today 197 countries have signed the treaty. One major reason for this success, however, is that these sprays were relatively easy and inexpensive to replace. Such is not the case for global climate change. Currently, there is no single, viable alternative to the carbon economy—a term used to reference our current economic dependence on carbon-based fuels such as petroleum and coal. Renewable energy sources, such as solar panels, are available, but not at the scale needed to fuel high-energy and high-consumption lifestyles. More than 150 countries have signed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which laid the groundwork for the Kyoto Protocol (1997) and the Paris Agreement (2015). With these agreements, most nations have committed to future goals for reducing fossil fuel emissions, but to date no nation has made significant progress toward these goals. Climate change is a complex problem, intrinsically tied to an economy that depends on access to inexpensive and abundant fuel sources. It is also a problem that cannot be addressed by one nation or group alone but rather calls attention to the shared nature of our planetary ecosystem and the impact that activities in one location have on every other life.

Philosophical Contributions to Environmental Ethics

Instrumental value of nature.

Traditional Western philosophies have been anthropocentric (human-centered), as discussed in the chapter on value theory . Humans are regarded as the sole possessors of intrinsic value , meaning that each human life is understood to possess value in itself and for its own sake. The natural world, on the other hand, has been viewed as having instrumental value , understood as having value solely as a means to satisfy human needs and desires. From ancient Greece to the Enlightenment, philosophers and scientists have studied the natural world with the goal of understanding how better to use it to achieve the goals of human societies.

Anthropocentric Obligations

Empiricism is often traced back to the work of Francis Bacon (1561–1626), whose experimental techniques led to the development of the scientific method and who advocated an inductive approach to scientific inquiry in his essay Novum Organum . According to Bacon, when nature becomes the object of study, it can be completely manipulated and used in accordance with God’s original plan for humanity on Earth. Bacon held the prevailing Christian view that God gave human beings dominion over the nonhuman world. Unlike an autonomous subject, an object can be treated without regard, manipulated for study, and exploited as a resource—all of which occurred as capitalism evolved in Western countries (Bacon 1878). Contemporary Western societies have viewed science and technology as an important vehicle for empowering humanity to manipulate and control nature, to force nature to bend to our will.

Early advocates of the environmental movement in the West associated this anthropocentric (human-centered) perspective with the environment crisis. In a well-known essay, “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis” (1967), Lynn White argues that the way we think about the environment has its roots in Judeo-Christian thinking that maintains the superiority of humans over the nonhuman world and teaches that the natural world was created for human use. If nature only has instrumental value, then we do not violate morality when we manipulate, destroy, or otherwise harm nature.

Some philosophers, however, point out that this same anthropocentric approach has the potential to foster an ethics of environmental care. According to this perspective, moral obligations concerning our treatment of the natural world can be justified by appealing to human interests and the desire for self-preservation. For example, we might argue that all humans have an interest in having access to clean air and drinkable water and in ensuring the longevity of Earth for future generations to enjoy. These basic interests that all humans share can be used as a basis for establishing moral obligations to reduce pollution, create more sustainable practices, and take actions to diminish harm caused to the environment by human activity.

In People or Penguins: The Case for Optimal Pollution (1974), for example, William Baxter offers an unapologetically anthropocentric environmental ethic. Baxter adopts a traditional view that assigns intrinsic value only to persons. He proposes that the fact that some harm has come to certain aspects of the nonhuman world is, in itself, not enough to justify moral responsibility. “Damage to penguins, or sugar pines, or geological marvels is, without more, simply irrelevant” (Baxter 1974, 5). That acknowledged, Baxter goes on to state that a moral obligation to the nonhuman world does exist, because human interests are intrinsically tied to the natural world. When it comes to pollution, for example, Baxter argues that we have a moral obligation to balance the benefits we get from causing pollution with the harm caused by pollution to establish a level of pollution that is optimal.

One proposed solution to the environmental crisis, in line with an anthropocentric approach, is to levy taxes on people and corporations when their activities are deemed detrimental to society and/or to planetary health. Currently, in the United States, many states levy extra taxes on the purchase of cigarettes and alcohol, above and beyond the established sales tax. These extra taxes are justified by pointing out that these products are detrimental to human health and that their consumption puts an unnecessary burden on the state’s health care systems. Some economists recommend using a similar approach to control environmental impact. In this scenario, a tax cost or liability would be imposed on companies or individuals who cause harm to the environment. A carbon emissions tax is an example of a such a tax. Of course, rewarding positive behavior could also work, for example, by giving tax breaks or other types of rewards to organizations that are working toward environmental sustainability. These policies align with the anthropocentric approach in that they hold organizations accountable for the harm they are doing to human society and human interests.

Deep Ecology and the Intrinsic Value of Nature

In stark contrast to the anthropocentricism that has long dominated Western thinking about the environment, deep ecology , a term first coined by Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess (1912–2009), assumes that all living things are valuable in their own right (Naess 1973). If all life has intrinsic value, then all life is deserving of respect. Deep ecology thus advocates a practice of restraint when it comes to the environment and to nonhuman life.

Deep ecology argues that we need to fundamentally change how we think about ourselves and our relationship to nature. This approach proposes that it is wrong to view ourselves as individual, separate entities. Instead, all of nature, including human beings, should be understood in terms of their relationships with everything else. This interrelatedness implies a responsibility to act in ways that respect the intrinsic value of all living things and promote life in the broadest sense. For deep ecologists, a first step in this approach is to become sensitive to and aware of the deep relationships that exist between everything in nature. Aware that we are more than this body and this mind, that we are members of a larger whole, we recognize that we have an obligation to promote and care for the natural world. Naess thought of deep ecology as a movement promoting a radical new worldview that contrasted sharply with the traditional view that valued nature only as a means to human ends.

Critics of deep ecology sometimes note that it is a position of privilege taken by people in developed nations and that less industrialized countries may not be in a position to respect the environment in the same way when their own survival is at risk. Environmental initiatives may be challenging for smaller, less industrialized countries to pursue. In these nations, the call to environmentalism may ring hollow to those who face a daily struggle for food or clean water.

Social Ecology

Social ecologists see environmental problems as stemming from the same faulty political and economic system that promotes inequity and is responsible for racism, sexism, and classism. In this view, capitalism has created a system of domination over both humanity and nature and has turned nature into just one more commodity. Murray Bookchin (1921–2006), an American political philosopher and a founder of social ecology, was highly influential in this line of thought. Bookchin believed that most, if not all, of the problems that make up our current environmental crisis are the result of long-standing social problems. He argued that the only way to address our ecological problems is to address our social problems. Bookchin proposed that we change society by rejecting large political structures and big business and empowering smaller, locally based groups that are more tied to their environments and thus more environmentally aware.

Concerns have also been raised about the unequal impact environmental problems have on different segments of society. Robert Bullard ’s 1990 book Dumping in Dixie argues that environmentalism is intertwined with issues of racial and socioeconomic equity. It is thus not just an issue of individual health but rather a concern about the health of communities. Historically marginalized communities in particular are statistically more likely to be exposed to environmental dangers. One egregious and well-publicized example of these types of dangers is the water crisis in Flint, Michigan. In 2014, it was realized that drinking water in Flint was contaminated with high levels of lead. This contamination was the result of a decision made by emergency managers appointed by the state government to switch Flint’s water supply from the Detroit water system to the Flint River, in order to save money. The Flint River water not only contained bacteria and carcinogens but also leached lead from the pipes that brought water to people’s homes. As a result, many suffered from rashes, hair loss, and elevated blood levels of lead (Denchak 2018). Another example can be seen in the South Bronx, in New York City. This area is sometimes referred to as an “island of pollution,” as it lies at the confluence of three major highways. The pollution from the traffic has resulted in an increase in asthma diagnoses and asthma-related hospitalizations in those living in this neighborhood, the majority of them Black Americans, Latinos, and new immigrants (Butini 2018).

Similar differences in environmental dangers can be observed on a global scale. A 2016 United Nations report reported that people in developing countries are more likely to live on land that has been exposed to contamination and chemical pollutants than those in wealthier nations (United Nations 2016).

Environmental Racism

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/1-introduction

• Authors: Nathan Smith
• Publisher/website: OpenStax
• Book title: Introduction to Philosophy
• Publication date: Jun 15, 2022
• Location: Houston, Texas
• Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/1-introduction
• Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/10-2-environmental-ethics

© Mar 1, 2024 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

This page has been archived and is no longer updated

Environmental Ethics

These questions, and others like them, are explored in this series. Environmental ethics is a branch of applied philosophy that studies the conceptual foundations of environmental values as well as more concrete issues surrounding societal attitudes, actions, and policies to protect and sustain biodiversity and ecological systems. As we will see, there are many different environmental ethics one could hold, running the gamut from human-centered (or "anthropocentric") views to more nature-centered (or "non-anthropocentric") perspectives. Non-anthropocentrists argue for the promotion of nature's intrinsic, rather than instrumental or use value to humans. For some ethicists and scientists, this attitude of respecting species and ecosystems for their own sakes is a consequence of embracing an ecological worldview; it flows out of an understanding of the structure and function of ecological and evolutionary systems and processes. We will consider how newer scientific fields devoted to environmental protection such as conservation biology and sustainability science are thus often described as "normative" sciences that carry a commitment to the protection of species and ecosystems; again, either because of their intrinsic value or for their contribution to human wellbeing over the long run.

The relationship between environmental ethics and the environmental sciences, however, is a complex and often contested one. For example, debates over whether ecologists and conservation biologists should also be advocates for environmental protection — a role that goes beyond the traditional profile of the "objective" scientist — have received much attention in these fields. Likewise, we will see that issues such as the place of animal welfare concerns in wildlife management, the valuation and control of non-native species, and the adoption of a more interventionist approach to conservation and ecological protection (including proposals to relocate wild species and to geoengineer earth systems to avoid the worst effects of global climate change) frequently divide environmental scientists and conservationists. This split often has as much to do with different ethical convictions and values regarding our responsibility to species and ecosystems as it does with scientific disagreements over the interpretation of data or the predicted outcomes of societal actions and policies.

The essays in this series illustrate the diversity of environmental ethics, both as a field of study and as a broader, value-based perspective on a complex web of issues at the junction of science and society. To gain a fuller understanding of the concepts and arguments of environmental ethics, begin with this introductory overview. From here you can explore a range of topics and questions that highlight the intersection of environmental ethics, ecology, and conservation science.

Conservation Biology: Ethical Foundations

Ecology: An Ethical Perspective

Sustainability: Ethical Foundations

Ethics and Global Climate Change

Ethics of Wildlife Management and Conservation: What Should We Try to Protect?

Sustainability Science: Ethical Foundations and Emerging Challenges

Valuing Ecosystems

Advocacy, Ecology, and Environmental Ethics

Conceptualizing and Evaluating Non-Native Species

Geoengineering and Environmental Ethics

Intrinsic Value, Ecology, and Conservation

Species Conservation, Rapid Environmental Change, and Ecological Ethics

© 2014 Nature Education

• Press Room |
• Terms of Use |
• Privacy Notice |

Home — Essay Samples — Environment — Environmental Protection — Environmental Ethics

Essays on Environmental Ethics

Explore the profound relationship between humanity and the natural world with our engaging collection of essays on environmental ethics. This thought-provoking anthology navigates through the philosophical underpinnings, challenges, and moral responsibilities we bear towards our environment.

Complexities of Environmental Ethics

Our environmental ethics essays provide a deep dive into the ethical principles guiding our interaction with the Earth's ecosystems. From conservation and sustainability to the rights of non-human entities, these essays cover a broad spectrum of issues at the heart of contemporary environmental debates.

Environmental Ethics: A Call to Action

Amidst growing environmental crises, our essays underscore the urgent need for ethical considerations in our decisions and actions. Explore discussions on climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution, all through the lens of ethical responsibility and stewardship.

Bridging Theory and Practice in Environmental Ethics

These essays not only ponder theoretical frameworks but also examine practical applications and case studies. Discover how environmental ethics shape policies, corporate practices, and individual behaviors towards achieving a more sustainable and just world.

Fostering a Global Ethical Dialogue

By bringing together diverse perspectives on environmental ethics, this collection aims to foster a global dialogue on how to live harmoniously with nature. It invites readers from all walks of life to reflect on their values, question prevailing norms, and contribute to a collective ethical response to environmental challenges.

How The Idea of Preservation of Nature Can Benefit from Environmental Ethics

Review of the environmental protection act, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Green Technology

Nanotechnology and environment, analysis on climate change and the deterioration of the environment, eco-friendly cleaning practices, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

The 'Polluter Pays' Principle: an Environmental Policy Perspective

Recycling in the automotive industry, the policy and ethics of the environmental protection agency (epa), stop plundering, start saving, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

Joseph Desjardins' Perspective on The Rapid Growth of Population and Our Responsibilities to Future Ancestors

Assessing my ecological footprint: a journey towards sustainability, the impact of china's progress on the environment, the relation and controversy between american diet and environmental ethics, measures to counteract harmful effect of acid rain, the impact of industrialization to the atmosphere and nature, an analysis of the importance of environmental education and awareness, environmental awareness as the only key for our future existence, how to take care of the environment to save our cultures, recycling waste is the best way to improve our environment, what i learned in ethics class: environmental ethics, the importance of keeping exotic animals, harmonie water: case study, land ethic summary, an analysis of ernest callenbach's ecotopia, relevant topics.

• Waste Management
• Wildlife Conservation
• Animal Ethics
• Conservation
• Energy Efficiency
• Green Building
• Water Conservation
• Animal Welfare

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• UPSC History Notes
• UPSC Geography Notes
• UPSC Polity Notes
• UPSC Ethics Notes
• UPSC Economics Notes
• UPSC Science and Technology Notes
• UPSC Govt. Schemes Notes
• UPSC eligibility-criteria
• UPSC Syllabus
• UPSC Exam Pattern
• UPSC Admit Card
• UPSC Optional Subject
• UPSC Prelims Syllabus
• UPSC Main Exam Pattern
• UPSC prelims-2024-exam-pattern

Environmental Ethics: Types, Importance, Examples

Environmental ethics is a field of study that seeks to understand humans’ moral obligations to protect and preserve the environment. It is a branch of ethics that recognizes the intrinsic value of nature, the interconnection of all living things, and the responsibility of humans to act in accordance with ethical principles.

Table of Content

What are environmental ethics, types of environmental ethics , importance of environmental ethics, examples of environmental ethics , principles of environmental ethics, environmental ethics and religion.

• Important Questions on Environmental Ethics

This article will explore the types of environmental ethics, the principles of environmental ethics, and some examples. It will also discuss the impact of environmental ethics on business decisions, the challenges of implementing environmental ethics, and the benefits of incorporating environmental ethics into business operations. Finally, we will discuss environmental ethics services.

Environmental ethics is a branch of ethical thought that focuses on the relationship between humans and their natural environment. It is a holistic approach to understanding and evaluating our moral obligations to protect and preserve the environment. Environmental ethics seeks to bring together the interests of both humans and the environment, recognizing that both are interdependent and have intrinsic value. A variety of ethical theories, including consequentialism, utilitarianism, and virtue ethics, define environmental ethics. These ethical theories provide a framework for understanding the moral obligations we have to the environment and how we should act to protect it. Environmental ethics also draws upon the fields of philosophy, economics, ecology, and law, providing a comprehensive approach to understanding and evaluating the moral implications of human actions.

• Libertarian Extension: Libertarian extension is a type of environmental ethics that focuses on an individual’s right to do whatever they want with the environment and its resources. This concept also stresses that an individual should not impose their own values on others and should instead respect the choices of others.
• Ecological Extension: Ecological Extension is a type of environmental ethics that focuses on preserving the natural environment and its resources in order to maintain the balance and health of the ecosystem. This concept stresses the importance of humans working with nature in order to sustain it for future generations.
• Conservation Ethics: Conservation Ethics is a type of environmental ethics that focuses on preserving natural resources for future generations by ensuring that current resources are not depleted or damaged beyond repair. This concept encourages individuals to use natural resources responsibly and judiciously so there will be enough for future generations.

In short, Libertarian extension promotes an individual’s right to use natural resources, Ecological Extension encourages humans to work with nature, and Conservation Ethics emphasizes sustainable use of natural resources. Each of these types of environmental ethics has its own benefits and should be taken into account when considering how to best protect the environment.

• Environmental ethics is essential for protecting the environment, species, and resources. 
• It promotes sustainable practices and encourages people to become more aware of the impact their actions have on the environment.
• It emphasizes the interconnectedness of all living things and the need to respect them. It encourages us to think about our place in the world and how we can contribute to preserving the natural environment.
• Environmental ethics helps to build better relationships with nature, recognizing its intrinsic value, not just its instrumental value.
• It encourages us to think beyond our immediate needs and consider the long-term implications of our actions.
• It teaches us responsibility towards our environment, advocating for environmentally friendly practices that help protect natural resources. 
• Environmental ethics also promotes better public policies and laws, which help ensure that our environment is properly cared for.

One example of environmental ethics in action is using renewable energy sources. Renewable energy sources are sources of energy that are naturally replenished and can be used without depleting natural resources. Examples of renewable energy sources include solar, wind, and hydropower. Renewable energy sources are seen as an ethical choice, as they do not cause pollution or deplete finite resources.

•  Respect for the intrinsic value of nature: Nature should not be treated as a commodity or resource to be exploited and discarded.
• Interdependence of species and ecosystems: Humans depend on nature and natural systems. We must recognize our role in preserving and protecting the environment.
•  Ecological sustainability: We must strive to use resources responsibly and with an eye to preserving ecosystems and biodiversity.
•  Human responsibility: We are responsible for our own actions and decisions and their consequences for the environment.
•  Human equity: We must strive for a just world where the rights and needs of humans, animals, and plants are respected and protected.
•  Precautionary principle: We should take precautions against environmental harm, even when scientific evidence is inconclusive.
•  Right to know: Individuals have the right to access information about environmental issues.
•  Right to participate: Citizens have the right to participate in environmental decision-making processes.

Environmental ethics and religion are closely linked, as religious texts often encourage us to respect the environment and our fellow human beings. Many religions, such as Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism, place value on the natural world and recognize our responsibility to care for it. In particular, the three Abrahamic religions – Judaism, Christianity, and Islam – share a belief in stewardship of the Earth, with the book of Genesis proclaiming, “And God said, ‘Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” This suggests that humans have a special relationship with nature and should care for and protect it.  In Hinduism, there is a concept known as Dharma which relates to the ethical and moral obligations of each person to their environment. This includes the idea of ahimsa, or non-violence, which suggests that all living things should be treated with compassion and respect. Buddhism also encourages us to take an ethical approach to the natural world by considering how our actions will impact the environment. Ultimately, regardless of one’s beliefs, understanding and respecting the environment is vital to living harmoniously on this planet. By incorporating religious teachings about environmental ethics into our lives, we can help ensure that our relationship with nature is optimistic.

Environmental Ethics: Types, Importance, Examples – FAQ’s

What is environmental ethics.

Environmental ethics is a branch of ethics that studies the moral relationship between humans and the natural environment. It seeks to answer questions such as what duties we owe to animals, how we should treat the environment, and how we can create an environmentally sustainable society.

What are the Types of Environmental Ethics?

There are three main types of environmental ethics: libertarian extension, ecological extension, and conservation ethics. Libertarian extension is based on the idea that people have a right to use nature for their own ends. The ecological extension considers that nature has value in and of itself beyond any human use or benefit. Finally, conservation ethics focuses on maintaining a balance between human use and the preservation of nature.

What are Environmental Ethics Examples?

Another example of environmental ethics in action is the use of sustainable agriculture methods. Sustainable agriculture methods are those that are designed to ensure that the land and resources used in agriculture remain productive and can continue to be used in the future. Examples of sustainable agriculture methods include crop rotation, integrated pest management, and conservation tillage. Finally, sustainable forestry practices are an example of environmental ethics in action. Sustainable forestry practices are designed to ensure that forests are managed in a way that preserves their biodiversity and ecological integrity. Examples of sustainable forestry practices include selective harvesting, reforestation, and the protection of old-growth forests.

What is the Importance of Environmental Ethics?

Environmental ethics is important because it provides a moral framework for how humans interact with the natural environment. It helps us consider the effects our actions have on the planet and guides us in making more ethical and sustainable decisions.

What is the Difference Between Ecology and Environmental Ethics?

Ecology is the scientific study of the relationships between organisms and their environment, while environmental ethics focuses on how humans should interact with the natural environment. Ecology looks at how organisms interact with each other and with their environment. In contrast, environmental ethics looks at how humans should interact with the natural environment in order to minimize harm and promote sustainability.

Similar Reads

Please login to comment..., improve your coding skills with practice.

What kind of Experience do you want to share?

What are Environmental Ethics? Types and Principles

Environmental ethics is a philosophical discipline focused on the moral principles guiding human interactions with nature and the environment, exploring responsible stewardship, preservation, and the intrinsic value of ecosystems and living beings.

Environmental ethics perceives humans as an integral part of a larger society comprising other living creatures, including plants and animals.

This field acknowledges the interconnectedness between all life forms and emphasizes our human role to ensure the well-being of all other members of the “bigger society”.

According to Wikipedia ,

“ In environmental philosophy, environmental ethics is an established field of practical philosophy “which reconstructs the essential types of argumentation that can be made for protecting natural entities and the sustainable use of natural resources.” The main competing paradigms are anthropocentrism, physiocentrism (called ecocentrism as well), and theocentrism. Environmmental ethics exerts influence on a large range of disciplines including environmental law, environmental sociology, ecotheology, ecological economics, ecology and environmental geography. “

Global warming , climate change , deforestation , pollution , resource degradation, and the threat of extinction are some issues our planet suffers from today. 

Environmental ethics is a key feature of environmental studies that establishes the relationship between humans and the earth. With these ethics, you can ensure you do your part to protect the environment.

Thankfully, following environmental ethics and principles isn’t as complex as you may think. In fact, as long as you’re willing to make some slight adjustments in lifestyle, then that’s what it takes!

With the rapid increase in the world’s population, the consumption of natural resources has increased several times. This has degraded our planet’s ability to sustain livelihood.

Environmental ethics builds on scientific understanding by bringing human values, moral principles, and improved decision-making into conversation with science . 

Earth Day helped to develop environmental ethics in the US, and soon after that, the same ethics were developed in other countries, including Canada and North America.

This is important because the ethics of the environment are of major concern these days.

What Causes Environmental Pollution?

Human activities remain the major cause of environmental pollution . As the human population grows, the demand for resources increases, contributing to environmental pollution.

The increasing global population brings with it a higher demand for resources, often surpassing the environment’s natural capacity to replenish them. This phenomenon creates an imbalance, leading to various environmental disturbances and challenges.

Several environmental issues have created havoc on our environment and human life. If ignored today, these ill effects will surely curb human existence soon.

The major environmental issues include pollution; overpopulation; industrial and household waste; acid rain; climate change; ozone layer depletion; urban sprawl; genetic engineering; deforestation; and global warming.

These problems have taken a toll on our environment, and we’ve already started seeing some disastrous effects in the form of the effect on human health; a rise in sea level; depletion of non-renewable resources; melting of glaciers; extinction of species; polluted landfills; toxic dust; decreasing soil fertility; a rise in air and water pollution; and many more.

Human beings are considered to be the most intelligent species living on earth. This could be why it is the only species on earth that has civilized itself over the decades to a large extent.

Today, humans boast of being superior to all other animals, but what is the use of such great intelligence when environmental ethics are not followed?

Cutting down trees is something that many humans do for their own benefit without any concern for the animals that are dependent on trees for survival.

Using fossil fuels erratically, industrialization, pollution, and disturbing ecological balance are attributable to human activities.

Just because we are in possession of all of these natural resources doesn’t mean we can use them in any manner we choose without keeping anything for future generations.

Environmental Ethics and Environmental Philosophy

Environmental ethics has been developed around environmental philosophy. Many scientists have taken up the belief in the philosophical aspect of environmental hazards , thus giving rise to environmental ethics. Currently, environmental ethics has become a major concern for mankind.

Industrialization has given way to pollution and ecological imbalance. If an industry is causing such problems, it is not only the duty of that industry but all human beings to make up for the losses.

But how long will an artificial and restored environment be able to sustain?

Will it be able to take the place of natural resources?

Environmentalists are trying to find answers to these difficult questions, which are termed environmental ethics.

It is the responsibility of all to ensure that environmental ethics are being met. It is somewhat difficult to make the necessary adjustments to ensure you follow all environmental ethics.

Ethics play an important role in today’s society , and environmental and business ethics must be considered. This has become more prevalent in today’s society.

Both oil and coal are bad, not only for the environment but also for all living creatures, including plants and animals . Both are highly toxic in their natural raw state.

They pollute the air, ground, and water , and whether or not they are helping to create these natural disasters should be irrelevant. They are both finite and will not last forever, and the sooner we rid ourselves of the need for these two hazards, the better.

Oil and coal companies promoting their products, including the notion of “clean coal,” raise ethical concerns, particularly regarding environmental ethics, as it is viewed as an unrealistic and unethical concept.

Many of the world’s problems stem from oil spills, mining accidents, fires, climate change, and global warming.

Ensure that you are doing your part and following all the environmental ethics that are out there.

Photo by: DepositPhotos

Environmental ethics and its principles.

There are several approaches or principles to determine how we are to value our environment. It is such a huge and vast field that it is difficult for one principal to cover all the ground.

Many theories have emerged over the years, and each one has stressed various principles of environmental ethics.

The list below states all the principles that have been predominantly found in those theories.

1. Anthropocentrism

It suggests that human beings are the most important beings. All other living beings are only accessories that would assist in their survival.

Now, there are two further divisions of anthropocentrism :

• Weak anthropocentrism
• Strong anthropocentrism

Weak anthropocentrism believes that human beings are the center because it is only through their perspective that environmental situations can be interpreted.

Strong anthropocentrism, however, believes that human beings are at the center because they rightfully deserve to be there. Peter Vardy made this distinction.

2. Non-Anthropocentrism

As opposed to anthropocentrism, non-anthropocentrism is a principle that gives value to every object and animal in nature.

It is the belief or perspective that human beings are not the central or most important beings in the world and that the well-being and interests of other species, ecosystems, or the planet as a whole should be considered and prioritized alongside or above human interests.

It emphasizes the interconnectedness and value of all life forms and seeks to challenge the idea of human superiority or dominance over nature.

3. Psychocentrism

Psychocentrism is the principle that believes that human beings hold more value in the environment since their mental capacities are better developed and far more complex than any other element in the environment.

4. Biocentrism

It is a term that holds not only an ecological but also a political value.

It is a philosophy that imparts importance to all living beings. Regarding environmental ethics, biocentrism is the principle that ensures the proper balance of ecology on the planet.

Jan Smuts coined the term holism in his book Holism and Evolution (1926) . Holism considers environmental systems as a whole rather than being individual parts of something.

It considers these environmental systems to be valuable.

6. Resourcism

The principle of resourcism says that nature is considered valuable only because it has resources to provide. Thus, nature ought to be exploited.

This principle calls for ethical decision-making to safeguard the environment’s health, fostering harmony between society and nature while mitigating the negative impacts of resource extraction and consumption.

7. Speciesism

The principle of speciesism justifies the superiority of the human race. Thus, it also justifies the exploitation and maltreatment of animals by humankind.

8. Moral Considerability

This is an important principle of environmental ethics. Intrinsic value is added to every being, which makes us consider being moral.

Moral considerable towards a being means we agree that moral laws bind all our interactions with the being and nature.

9. Instrumental Value

The instrumental value is the value imparted to a being as long as it can serve us with resources. It’s a “selfish” concept that advocates for valuing nature as long as it supplies humans with the resources they need to meet their individual needs.

10. Intrinsic Value

The concept of intrinsic value is a contrast to instrumental value. This concept acknowledges the inherent worth of nature that deserves some moral consideration despite its usefulness or non-usefulness to humans.

According to this principle, all elements of nature have the right to live and flourish, despite whether they serve any purpose to humans or not!

11. Aesthetic Value

The principle of aesthetic value recognizes the inherent beauty and aesthetic worth of nature and its components.

This principle clearly highlights the importance of maintaining environmental aesthetics for the enrichment of human experiences and overall well-being.

12. Animal Liberation or Animal Rights

As is evident from its name, animal liberation or rights try to secure animal life and ensure their welfare by enforcing certain laws.

13. Animal Welfare

Animal welfare ensures that the animals are treated well and humanely.

It focuses on minimizing animal suffering and promoting well-being, recognizing animals as sentient beings. It seeks to ensure their basic needs are met and advocates for responsible treatment and compassionate relationships between humans and animals.

Types of Environmental Ethics

With the emergence of several theories, several environmental ethics have emerged. While some protect human beings, others protect plants, animals, and other elements of nature.

The types include:

• Social ecolog y studies human beings and their relationships to their environment.
• Deep ecology promotes the idea that all beings have an intrinsic value.
• Ecofeminism is a branch of feminism that helps us look at the earth as a woman so that we can respect it in a better way.

Why is Environmental Ethics Important?

Environmental ethics is important because it serves as the moral ground to protect our planet’s environment and continuously fix the environmental degradation we have caused over the years.

Let us look at the benefits we get from environmental ethics.;

• They remind us of our environmental responsibilities, awakening our ecological consciousness.
• People would continue to degrade and destroy our planet and live as if they were not dependent on nature. But with the ecological consciousness provided by environmental ethics, we can lead towards a sustainable future, an ecological balance, and the enrichment of our environment’s diversity.
• We are reminded that despite being the most dominant and superior beings in nature, we are also expected to be the most responsible for keeping our environment, or planet, habitable and clean.
• Humans are being humbled and reminded of their main responsibilities to nature through them. With our capacity, the misbalances occurring in the environment can be fixed by some minor or major actions.
• We become considerate of not only ourselves but also plants, animals, and every object in nature.
• With the moral grounds and values of environmental ethics, humans responsibly use nature, not in a way that results in resource degradation and destruction.

Every object in nature has its own purpose and use, neglecting its uses for humans. That said, it is just right to be a responsible consumer, as humans do not have the right to destroy nature’s richness and diversity.

To sum it up, environmental ethics is a safeguard against cruelty to all creatures. It helps maintain ecological balance and provides a peaceful and beautiful living environment.

Instead of polluting our environment, degrading our resources, and destroying our planet, environmental ethics leads humans to act accordingly for the welfare of all in our environment and nature.

About Arindom Ghosh

A professional writer, editor, blogger, copywriter, and a member of the International Association of Professional Writers and Editors, New York. He has been part of many reputed domestic and global online magazines and publications. An avid reader and a nature lover by heart, when he is not working, he is probably exploring the secrets of life.

Interesting Posts You May Like...

Are Zoos Really Ethical? Insights From The 2 Sides of The Debate!

How To Dispose of Broken TV Sustainably?

20+ Things That You Shouldn’t Buy as an Environmentalist

The 8 R’s of Sustainability: True Environmental Stewardship

Pros and Cons of a Heat Pump

Pros and Cons of Tiny House Living

• DOI: 10.1111/J.1747-9991.2009.00206.X
• Corpus ID: 145063051

Environmental Ethics: An Overview

• Katie McShane
• Published 1 May 2009
• Philosophy, Environmental Science
• Philosophy Compass

20 Citations

Cultural, ethical, and religious perspectives on environment preservation., hmong spirituality, nature, and place, ecological limits: science, justice, policy, and the good life, biodiversity offsetting: ethical views within environmental organisations in the european union, environmental pragmatism, systematism and the reach of environmental ethics, environmental public policy from transaction costs and complexity of formulation in the case of the common fisheries policy of the european union, mandatory non-anthropocentrism: the political unrealism of making metaethical demands in environmental ethics, attitude construction toward invasive species through an eco-humanist approach: a case study of the lesser kestrel and the myna, local opposition and acceptance of a deep geological repository of radioactive waste in the czech republic: a frame analysis, how not to talk about environmental personhood: thinking transitional concepts, 70 references, unequal protection : environmental justice and communities of color, the power and the promise of ecological feminism, in nature's interests interests, animal rights, and environmental ethics (review), the case for animal rights, environmental ethics and weak anthropocentrism, why environmental ethics shouldn’t give up on intrinsic value, animal liberation: a triangular affair, radical american environmentalism and wilderness perservation: a third world critique, uncommon ground : rethinking the human place in nature, the social creation of nature, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Environmental Ethics

Environmental ethics is a branch of philosophy that tries to help us understand what is right when it comes to our relationship to the environment. Environmental ethics seeks to answer questions such as:

• Should we value human life over all other forms of life on earth? Or, are they equal?
• How should we treat non-human parts of our earth, like rocks and water?
• Is it moral to kill an animal or a plant?
• And much more…

Breaking It Down

Ethics is the area of study seeking to understand what is moral. Also known as “moral philosophy”, those who engage in ethics attempt to define what behavior is right or wrong.

Environment , in the context of environmental ethics, most often refers to the natural environment of the world: the health of natural resources, biodiversity, and earth’s natural processes.

Environmental Ethics takes the philosophy of what is moral and applies it to our environment to try to make sense of our relationship with the world. There are many different approaches to studying and thinking about environmental ethics. Here we will give you an introduction to the three main camps and link you to resources where you can learn more about each.

The 3 Main Types of Environmental Ethics

The three main philosophies that help us think about our relationship with nature and what type of actions we should consider moral lie on a spectrum. On one side of the spectrum is the belief that humans are the most important and everything else in our environment should serve to benefit us. On the other side of the spectrum is the belief that all aspects of the environment, including animals, plants, and elements like rock and water, should be regarded as valuable and should be treated as such.

The names of these three philosophies are:

• Anthropocentrism – Value human life
• Biocentrism – Value all biological life
• Ecocentrism – Value all forms of environment

Here’s a quick explanation of each philosophy:

Anthropocentrism :

Anthropocentrism is an environmental philosophy that believes humans are the only beings worthy of moral standing. This philosophy places humans not only as separate from nature, but as more important than nature. Anthropocentrist viewpoints assign value to other parts of nature based on value to humans, rather than a belief in the intrinsic value of a natural thing. 

Under anthropocentrism, it is morally acceptable for humans to exploit other parts of nature such as animals, trees, or water in order to benefit themselves. For example, anthropocentrism would argue that trees can be cut down in order to provide wood to keep humans warm. 

Anthropocentrism can result in preservation of natural resources, but this preservation is based on the idea that we should preserve the resource so that humans can continue to rely on it. Returning to the example above, anthropocentric viewpoints would argue for preserving a forest in order to protect the supply of wood for humans, rather than to preserve the forest’s inherent value.

Biocentrism :

Biocentrism is an environmental philosophy that believes all life deserves equal moral consideration. Under biocentrism, not just humans, but all living beings are considered to have intrinsic value. If something is living, then it should be morally valued.

Biocentrism argues that all life should be valued intrinsically, as every living thing has its own purpose and is working towards its own goals. Because every living being has moral value under biocentrism, it is morally wrong to harm another living being or stop it from pursuing its own goals, even if it is for a human’s benefit.

Ecocentrism : 

Ecocentrism is one of the most all-encompassing environmental philosophies, as it extends moral value to all parts of the ecosystem, including humans, living organisms, and non-living things. In other words, ecocentrism believes moral consideration should be extended to non-living parts of the ecosystem like rocks and water.

Ecocentrist viewpoints are nature-centered, rather than human-centered (anthropocentrism) or life-centered (biocentrism). Ecocentrists do not place some ecosystems (or parts of ecosystems) above others in importance. Rather, ecocentrism argues that all parts of the ecosystem have intrinsic value.

Comparing The 3 Philosophies

Here is a comparison of these main 3 philosophies:

A Brief History of Environmental Ethics

The philosophy of environmental ethics has a long history. Philosophers have been debating the role humans should play in conserving the environment and the various ecosystems the world supports for hundreds of years. 

Despite the long history of thinking about questions related to ethics and the natural environment, environmental ethics did not become an “official” subfield of philosophy until the early 1970s. According to Katie McShane , the field came about, “as a result of the growing environmental consciousness and social movements of the 1960s, public interest increased in questions about humans’ moral relationship with the rest of the natural world.”

According to many environmental theorists, traditional ethical theories were incapable of bringing human awareness to their relationship with the environment, and instead, focused solely on the moral relationships between humans. In response to this theory, ethical philosophies such as the ones described above were theorized, in order to help humans become accountable for their moral obligations to the nonhuman world.

What Issues Does Environmental Ethics Help Us Address?

The main concern of environmental ethical philosophies is how humans treat the world around them. While some environmental ethical philosophies, like anthropocentrism, don’t believe we owe anything to nature or other non-human entities, others may take the opposite approach. For example, as discussed above, ecocentrists believe that all parts of the ecosystem deserve moral respect. Finally, many ecophilosophers, generally called biocentrists, take a more middling approach, arguing that we should respect other living beings.

These philosophies impact how we interact with natural resources. Take, for example, the issue of eating meat. While an anthropocentrist would likely take no issue with this, as they believe humans are superior to other living beings, a biocentrist or ecocentrist is likely to reject this argument. On the other hand, anthropocentrists and biocentrists may not be as concerned as an ecocentrist about damage to the Earth through mining (although biocentrists certainly would be concerned about the resulting impacts on wildlife!).

The reality is that humans are dependent on natural resources for survival, from food to wood to water. Environmental ethics helps us make choices about how to use those resources in a moral way. Many environmentalists come down somewhere in the middle, arguing that while we are reliant on natural resources, we must also work to conserve it for future generations’ use (conservation), to protect wildlife, and to preserve the Earth’s inherent value (preservation).

• What Is an Example of Environmental Ethics?
• Current Issues in Environmental Ethics

Conclusion 

“Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.” – George Bernard Shaw .

The purpose of environmental ethics is to help us come to a moral understanding of how we interact with the world around us. This understanding is a crucial aspect of environmentalism, as environmental ethics often lead us to a desire to protect the Earth around us, even if our motivations for doing so are different. In a way, the guidelines that environmental ethics provide helps guide us towards moral actions and holds us responsible for sticking to our principles. Without humans being held accountable for their actions against ecosystems and nature, we will run out of natural resources sooner than we think. 

612 Environment Essay Topics & Examples

Looking for interesting environment essay topics? This field is really exciting and worth studying!

🏆 Best Environment Essay Examples & Topics

👍 interesting environment topic ideas, 🎓 simple & easy environment essay titles, 🥇 easy environment essay topics, 📌 more topics on environment, 💡 good research topics about environment, ❓ environment essay questions.

Environment study field includes the issues of air, soil, and water pollution in the world, environment conservation, global climate change, urban ecology, and much more. In this article, we’ve gathered interesting environmental topics to write about. You might want to use one of them for your argumentative or persuasive essay, research paper, and presentation. There is also a number of great environment essay examples.

• Human Impact on Environment Another important action we perform to improve the situation with water is avoiding water pollution. It helps to keep the healthy and to reduce water pollution.
• Mining and Its Impact on the Environment The purpose of this paper is to describe and discuss the effects of mining on the environment. This approach is sustainable and capable of reducing the dangers of mining.
• The Effect of Technology on the Environment At the present moment, humankind has to resolve one of the most complicated dilemmas in its history, in particular how to achieve equilibrium between the needs of people or and the risks to the Earth.
• Protecting the Environment Protecting the environment is the act of taking care of natural resources and using them rationally to prevent annihilation and pollution.
• Plastic vs Paper Bags: Production and Environment Though the production of plastic bags is frequently banned nowadays because of considerable harm to the animal world and marine life, the effects of this product on people and the environment seem to be less […]
• Electric Car and the Environment Other factors that contributed to the rise in demand of electric cars included a rise in oil prices and the need to conserve the environment by controlling the rate of greenhouse gas emission. One of […]
• Impacts of Overpopulation on the Environment Other primary causes of deforestation are construction of roads and residential houses to cater for the increasing population. As the natural habitats are destroyed, many wildlife species have been displaced and many died due to […]
• Human Behavior Effects on the Environment However, while some people are doing all they can to protect the environment, some are participating in activities that cause harm to the environment.
• Globalization and Environment Essay While this is the case, citizens equally have a role to play in addressing the issue of globalization and climate change.
• Impact of Science and Technology on the Natural Environment He “is constantly aware of the influence of nature in the form of the air he breathes, the water he drinks, the food he eats, and the flow of energy and information”.
• Environmental Concerns in the Modern World Loss of biodiversity which is the decrease of species in ecosystems is also among the major concern faced by human race.
• Solution to Environmental Problems Environmental problems can therefore, be defined as the issues that result to the degradation of the environment because of the negative actions of human beings on the biophysical environment.
• Overcrowding in Cities as Social & Environmental Problem Uncontrolled growth in the number of cities leads to the unchecked spread of pollution and the escalation of poverty. Atmospheric pollution is the most serious in cities, and its primary source is road transport, which […]
• Panama Canal and Its Environmental Impacts The construction of the Panama Canal has profound local environmental impacts which are based on socio-political management of the project that has demonstrated the infrastructural and ecological interdependence of its service as a global transportation […]
• Fast Fashion’s Negative Impact on the Environment And this is the constant increase in production capacity, the low quality of the product, and the use of the labor of the population of developing countries.
• Bakhoor as a Harmful Incense for Health and Environment In this study, the researcher will conduct a scientific investigation to determine if, indeed, the use of Bahkoor in the United Arab Emirates is harmful to the environment.
• Environmental Abuse and Its Adverse Effects The poor are often the most affected by environmental abuse, as they are the least able to protect themselves from the harmful effects of pollution and other environmental hazards.
• Humanity and the Environment Many key factors affect the relationship between population and the environment within a particular region, including the number of inhabitants, their living standards and needs, technological advancements, the population’s attitude and philosophy towards nature, and […]
• Environment and Human Attitude Towards It Although the issue of attitude towards the environment can address most of the predicaments affecting humanity today, there are various actions and initiatives that can be undertaken to transform the situation and reduce people’s ecological […]
• Cleaning the Air at the West Carolina Environmental Protection Agency It is therefore important to note that an organization is just as good as the principles of public administration and the degree to which it stringently obeys these principles.
• The Concept of Environmental Ethics Environmental ethics is concerned with the ethical relationship of human beings with the environment. Human beings must relate ethically with all other living organisms.
• Importance of Recycling in Conservation of the Environment This piece of work looks at the different aspects associated with the process of recycling with much emphasis being given to the history of recycling and the facts associated with recycling process.
• Overconsumption and Its Impact on the Environment The purpose is to examine the statement’s applicability in light of global mineral production and consumption, emphasizing the Canadian resource industry.
• Urbanization and the Environment Due to urbanization, the number, the size, the kind and the compactness of cities, in addition to the effectiveness of their management of the environment are major concerns for attainment of the international sustainability.
• Poverty and the Environment The human population affects the environment negatively due to poverty resulting to environmental degradation and a cycle of poverty. Poverty and the environment are interlinked as poverty leads to degradation of the environment.
• Food Contamination and Adulteration: Environmental Problems, Food Habits, Way of Cultivation The purpose of this essay is to explain reasons for different kinds of food contamination and adulteration, harmful contaminants and adulterants and the diseases caused by the usage of those substances, prevention of food contamination […]
• Social, Economic and Environmental Challenges of Urbanization in Lagos However, the city’s rapid economic growth has led to high population density due to urbanization, creating social, economic, and environmental challenges the challenges include poverty, unemployment, sanitation, poor and inadequate transport infrastructure, congestion in the […]
• Green Buildings and Environmental Sustainability This paper scrutinizes the characteristics that need to be possessed by a building for it to qualify as green coupled with questioning the capacity of the green movements across the globe to prescribe the construction […]
• Food Production and The Environment So all aspects of production – the cultivation and collection of plants, the maintenance of animals, the processing of products, their packaging, and transportation, affect the environment.
• Changing Environment and Human Impact Also, a changing environment can fundamentally contribute to the advancement of one’s sense of agency and leadership values as they make an epistemological logic of their learning environment at a younger age.
• Organic Food Is Not a Cure for Environmental and Health Issues For instance, the same group of scientists claims that the moderate use of pesticides in organic agriculture is particularly important to consider while purchasing food.
• Climate Change: Human Impact on the Environment This paper is an in-depth exploration of the effects that human activities have had on the environment, and the way the same is captured in the movie, The Eleventh Hour.
• The Role of Man in Environment Degradation and Diseases The link between environmental degradation and human beings explains the consequences of the same in relation to the emergence of modern-age diseases.
• Impact of Emirates Airlines’ Operations on the Environment This makes it difficult for Emirates to develop policies that can have a direct influence on the environmental performance of the aircrafts.
• Application of Geography (GIS) in Biotechnology in Field of Agriculture and Environment According to Wyland, “the ability of GIS to analyze and visualize agricultural environments and work flows has proved to be very beneficial to those involved in the farming industry”.
• Tourism and Environment In order to address the impacts of tourism on the environment, there is need to discuss how to replace the income that may be lost by implementing these measures. Environmental conservation in tourism is responsible […]
• Tourism – Environment Relationships Relationship between tourism and the environment There is a great dependency of tourism on the environment as described by Holden and Fennel’s book The Routledge Handbook of Tourism and Environment.
• The Effect of Plastic Water Bottles on the Environment In addition, the proponents of plastic use have argued that recycling is an effective method of mitigating the effects of plastic to the environment.
• A Role of Human Beings in Protecting the Environment This attitude would be informed by the notion that humans are engaging in actions intended to transform the planet and the natural environment in order to suit them.
• Environmental Assessment – Environmental Management Systems Additionally, a good EMS is usually structured in a manner that allows the identification of the impact of the organization on the environment.
• Role of Non-Governmental Organisations in the Development of Sustainable Environmental Initiatives 1 The questions that currently ringer in people’s mind include why the NGOs are increasingly participating in environmental conservation projects, whether their initiatives are different from those they initiated in the past, and what exactly […]
• Environmental Crisis: People’s Relationship With Nature It is apparent that people have strived to steer off the blame for the environmental crisis that the world is facing, but they are the primary instigators of the problem.
• E-Waste Management for the Local Environment The negative consequence of poor e-waste management, such as poor e-waste disposal, might cue the thoughts of the locals on the need to improve on their environmental awareness, thus joining the local environmental organization proposed.
• Fog and Its Effects on the Environment Depending on where and how the cooling effect takes place, the appearance and lasting duration of fog are affected and using this scientists have been able to categorize fog into various groups namely steaming fog, […]
• Mining and Environment in Papua New Guinea In line with this commitment, the company implemented some of its strategies as indicated in the 2017 report on its operations in Chile.
• Historical Relationship of the Choctaws, Pawnees, and Navajos and How It Is Changing the Environment To begin with, the hunting practices of this native group, as well as the invasion of the European into their land, led to a great decline in the herds of the white-tailed deer in the […]
• Ensuring Healthy and Clean Environment: Importance of Recycling Ensuring that we have air to breathe, water to drink and that we do not create a planet which becomes the very cause for the end of the human race.
• McDonald’s: Human Rights and Environmental Sustainability Core values of the company One of the core values of the company is the respect for the fundamental rights of human beings.
• E-Waste Management in the School Environment Recycling Recycling is one of the best ways of managing e-waste in the school. Specifically, the school should roll out a comprehensive campaign on the need to dump the e-wastes in these bins.
• The Nestle Company’s Environmental Sustainability Efforts What I like about Nestle’s environmental sustainability efforts: Nestle’s environmental sustainability efforts are concise and clear towards the company’s sustainability plans, that is, clear goals and objectives which are time bound. The company’s sustainability efforts […]
• Environmental Pollution and Its Effect on Health In climate change, due to air pollution, the main force to prevent environmental disasters need to change the approach to the production of substances from fossil fuels.
• Environmental Factors in the Emergence of the Egyptian Civilization Importantly, the physical composition of the land and natural resources alongside artifacts of ancient Egypt had a substantial impact on the country’s growth and development.
• Environmental Protection and Waste Management The analysis also focuses on the intellectual behaviour of people regarding the environmental effects of waste. There is lack of strong basis for scientific findings and current guidance is causing the environmental challenges to become […]
• The Genus Rosa’s Adaptation to the Environment Alternative hypothesis: The abundance and distribution of stomata, storage, transport, and floral structures have a substantial influence on the adaptation of the genus Rosa to its environment.
• Environmental Health Practice The WHO has executed the Global Environment Monitoring System – Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment Program; this program informs government, non-governmental organizations and the public of various levels of contaminants in food and their effects […]
• Environmental Initiative: Reducing Plastic Waste In this presentation, it has been proposed to reduce the use of plastic products despite their wide popularity.
• Human Population and the Environment The fertility rate of a given species will depend on the life history characteristics of the species such as the number of reproductive periods in the lifetime of the species and the number of offspring […]
• The Upper Big Branch Mine Disaster and Environment When the accident occurred, coal mining was at the peak of its popularity, providing the country with half of the electricity generated nationwide.
• Sustainability and Human Impact on Environment Sustainability entails the analysis of ecosystem functioning, diversity, and role in the balance of life. It is the consideration of how humanity can exploit the natural world for sustenance without affecting its ability to meet […]
• The Impact of Food Habits on the Environment The topic of this research is based on the issue of human-induced pollution or another environmental impact that affect the Earth and dietary approaches that can improve the situation.
• Environmental Impacts and Solutions: Solid Waste The objective of solid waste management is to reduce the amount of solid waste disposed on land and lead to the recovery of material from solid waste through various recycling efforts.
• The Go-Green Programs: Saving the Environment Thus, the spirit of going green entails getting different people in the world to become aware of their decisions and activities that hurt the environment and the world at large.
• Wood and Its Importance for Environment Support Despite the intentions to use wood in a variety of ways without thinking about consequences, wood has to be considered as a helpful natural resource with many positive impacts on the environment, human health, and […]
• Construction Solutions in Saline Environment The researcher concluded that, indeed, salinity is one of the major causes of concrete disintegration and reduces the durability of buildings in saline environments.
• Human-Environment Interdependence The problem of the environment change and the attitude of people to their own culture remains one of the most curious and urgent problems of modern time.
• Environmental Pollution: Causes and Consequences The essay will provide an overview of pollution and proffer solutions to combating pollution for a sustainable environment and health. Preventing pollution lowers the cost to the environment and the economy.
• Negative Impact on the Environment The fact that human activity and industrial development negatively affect the environment is not debated because the sad reality shows that oceans, soil, and air are polluted, and many species are endangered. Overall, the main […]
• E- Commerce and the Environment Introduction Reliance on the internet and mobile devices to do business leads to the so-called E-commerce. The term is hardly old, based on its adoption in the 2000s after the internet revolution. E-commerce is a real force in the present and future business world due to several facets. For example, the invention’s capacity to eliminate […]
• Hairy Frog’s Adaptations and Environment It releases the claw by contracting the muscles in its rear feet and causing the claw to appear by piercing the frog’s skin.
• The Roles of Environmental Protection Agencies As a personal response to the argument; the individual’s involvement in environmental conservation is not enough as there is need for policy and regulation enforcement where he can only give advice to the federal government […]
• Water Pollution as a Crime Against the Environment In particular, water pollution is a widespread crime against the environment, even though it is a severe felony that can result in harm to many people and vast territories.
• Importance of Environmental Studies for Society It is upon the people to take care of the planet and understanding how human activities affect the environment is a critical step in that process.
• Environmental Policy Recommendation Furthermore, the policymakers need to be fully supported by the relevant agencies such as the ministry of environment to eliminate the existing and the projected obstacles that will prevent the full implementation of renewable energy […]
• Environmental Impact of Bottled Water The process of manufacturing the water bottles, such as the dependence on fossil fuels, is causing a lot of direct as well indirect destructing to the environment.
• Technology’s Role in Environmental Protection: The Ocean Cleanup Proponents of The Ocean Cleanup technology emphasize the fact that the devices have the capacity to effectively address oceanic plastic pollution.
• Ancient Egypt: Geography and Environment Thus, the country’s main river occupies a central place in the peculiarities of the culture and development of Egypt. Being a transit region, Egypt also managed to absorb the influence of other areas and enrich […]
• Food Web and Impact of Environmental Degradation In the course of this paper, ‘conservation’ refers to the preservation of natural resources that are, in any way, involved in the functioning of the food web.
• Tundra Biome: Environmental Impacts on Organisms The major difference between the alpine and the arctic tundra is that the alpine grounds are not covered by the permafrost.
• Whaling as Unethical Environmental Problem In this regard, the flow of energy and the biological pump of marine life depend on the whales’ survival. Some of the species like the blue whale play a crucial role in regulating the population […]
• Environmental Science & Technology In terms of architecture, the attempts of architects to decrease the impact on the environment right from the beginning is based on the desire to produce the item of the building components, continuing so in […]
• Technology Impact on Society and Environment It is possible to think of a variety of effects of technology. Availability of food also adds to the increase of people’s lifespan.
• Environmental Pollution: Causes and Solutions The consequences that have risen as a result of neglecting to take care of the environment have now become a reality to the whole of mankind.
• Environment: Endangered Species Global warming also increases the risk of storms and drought, affecting food supply, which may cause death to both humans and animals.
• Importance of Environmental Conservation for Public Health The research study has also recommended the conservation of tropical forests so that the broad diversity of natural plant species can be beneficial in the management of public health.
• Importance of Environment Schlosberg believes that all the terms has only led to confusion with little help, he says “Yet all of these developments in justice theory, very little has been applied in environmental justice movement”.
• Environmental Psychology: The Impact of Interior Spaces on Childhood Development Nevertheless, with regards to children and their physical and cognitive development, environmental psychology addresses how experiences and exposures to various socio-environmental components affect children’s brain structure and their ability to control their emotions and behaviors.
• How to Fight Environmental Imbalances The environment has to have balance in it because of the need to uphold the equilibrium of interactions inside food webs and maintain the cyclic flow of materials from the abiotic environment to the biosphere […]
• Environmental Factors and Health Promotion: Indoor and Outdoor Air Pollution This presentation offers some information about the damage of air pollution and presents a health promotion plan with helpful resources and evidence from research.
• Avocado Production and Socio-Environmental Issues The thesis presents information regarding the situation with the sustainability of the forest of Cheran in Mexico. This article draws a connection between the increased export of avocados and the subsequent deforestation and claims the […]
• Eco-Labels: Environmental Issues in Business Overall, it is possible to argue that they can certainly lead to the improvement of environmental practices in many industries; however, this goal can be achieved only if these certificates are given by independent and […]
• Kenya and Brazil: Comparing Environmental Conflict This loss of habitat has contributed to the species loss already aggravated by illegal hunting and open armed conflict in the region.
• Environmental Impacts of Tourism The sphere of tourism is reliant on the environment of the sites in which the visitors are interested. The industry of invasive tourism continues to grow people are becoming more and more interested in traveling […]
• Restaurant’s Environment-Friendly Rules In conclusion, though it may prove to be costly, this is just a step that I have taken towards making our environment better and safer, and the more significant task lies with you.
• The Importance of Saving the Environment Toxins and contaminants pollute the environment and consequently interfere with the health of man and other animals. In other words, the future is guaranteed if the environment can be safeguarded and preserved at the current […]
• Environmental Health Factors: Positive & Negative Additionally, it will expound on the impacts of nutrition, globalization, and observance of human rights to an individual’s health. Some of the positive environmental factors include adequate sources of nutrition, availability of safe water, presence […]
• Environmental Risk, Risk Management, and Risk Assessment The estimation of the possible consequences includes presence of the hazard, the possibility of the receptors getting affected by the hazard and the consequential damage from exposure to the hazard.
• Human Impact to the Environment – Cuba Deforestation Issue One of the most significant aspects during the political eras in the nation that characterized the political development was the fluctuation in deforestation.
• Acidic Rain Effects on the Environment Preview The interest of this paper is to explore the impacts of acidic rain on the PH of the soil and the leaching processes.
• Organisms in Terrestrial and Aquatic Environments Water is a dense medium, and thus plants living in water have a weak shaft for supporting the foliage and the upperparts of the plant.
• Wireless Power Transmission Implication for the Environment Designing the coils would form the trickiest task, since they have to be adjusted to the right frequency relying on the distance of the wire, the amount of loops in the wire and the capacitor.
• Environmental Impact of Medical Wastes These inconsistencies are present in the Federal guidelines laid down by the States with regards to the definition of medical waste and the management options available for handling, transporting, treating and disposing medical waste.
• Moral Obligations in Environment Synergy between the four components of the environment is crucial to the stability of the environment. In this regard, the lack of moral obligation in human beings when interacting with land amounts to a violation […]
• Environmental Protection of the American Forests Two approaches to the issue of environmental protection of forests will be examined in the following paper, the approach described in the article “The American Forests” by John Muir and in the article “Save the […]
• Disney’s Representations of Nature At the end of the films, man’s relation to nature shows a strong sense of commitment to conservation. It is the swamp which ultimately leads Snow White to a teeming life of the forest.
• Climate Change: Causes, Impact on People and the Environment Climate change is the alteration of the normal climatic conditions in the earth, and it occurs over some time. In as much as there are arguments based around the subject, it is mainly caused by […]
• Health and Environment: The Impact of Technology This is a foundation of the healthcare sector that has been offering support to the integration and operation of variety of health services applications and thus contributing to the betterment of the healthcare sector.
• Greenwashing: Full Environmental Sustainability? For companies, to be 100% sustainable and ethical would mean that each time they are presented with a decision, they would make people or nature their priority.
• Endangered Species: Modern Environmental Problem Some of the activities which cause danger to these species include the following; This refers to loss of a place to live for the animals and can also be expressed as the ecosystem or the […]
• Business Obligations With Respect to Environment The analysis focuses on the ethical concerns faced by Virgin Blue Holdings which is one of the major airline company’s in Australia, and how the management deals with these issues within the environmental setup.
• Environment and Renewable Energy A greater focus on renewable energy development is necessary in this day and age due to the various problems brought about by the use of fossil fueled power plants, which have caused not only an […]
• Eco and Cultural Tourism: Extraordinary Experience and Untouched Natural Environment Water which is the source of all forms of life must be used sustainably and thus to be considered an eco friendly resort, water pollution should be unheard of within the resort and water recycling […]
• Economic Growth and Environment Relation Although the relevance of the EKC and the focus on the stages of development as the important factors to speak about the relationship between the economic growth and environment are highly debatable issues, it is […]
• Environmental Sustainability on a Global Scale Compared to the world at the beginning of the 21st century, it required perceptional changes toward nature, biodiversity, and ecosystems, as well as reforms in agriculture and management of water, energy, and waste.
• Deforestation Impact on Environment and Human On a larger scale, it is important to reduce the consumption of paper and engage in raising awareness of the issue to strengthen the actions for addressing it.
• The United Nations Environmental Program and Sustainable Development Goals The current environmental issue of waste management will shape the future operations of UNEP under the gradient of recycling and use of biodegradable materials as the core sustainable initiative to eradicate the negative impact of […]
• The Introduction of Environmental Legislation Governments in Australia and all over the world try to protect the environmental damage through the introduction of environment-related laws and regulations. In Australia, the State, Commonwealth, and the local governments introduce and administers legislation […]
• Architecture and the Environment With today’s research people have been made aware of the advantages and disadvantages that have been brought about by the architecture of surrounding infrastructure.”The amount and size of windows in a room, openness, shape/form and […]
• Biodiversity Hotspots and Environmental Ethics The magnitude of the problem of losing biodiversity hotspots is too great, to the extend of extinction of various species from the face of the earth.
• The Positive Impact of Environment on Tourist Industry However, usual conditions are the foundation for the majority of forms of tourism and its collisions may also alter the good-looking skin of a site.
• Fish Farming Impacts on the Environment To begin with, according to Abel and Robert, fish farming has been generalized to have adverse effects on the environment, which ranges from the obliteration of the coastal habitats which are sensitive in the environment, […]
• Anthropocene and Human Impact on Environment While the exaggeration of the issue, as well as misinterpretation of some facts and conclusions, indeed take place, the conclusion drawn by the deniers is wrong and simply aligns the bias in the opposite direction, […]
• Is Recycling Good for the Environment? Recycling is good for the environment and should be included in the daily routine of any person that cares about the planet and the future of our children.
• Natural Resources and the Environment For example, the use of natural gas, oil, and coal leads to the production of carbon dioxide, which pollutes the environment.
• Population Growth Impacts on the Environment Today, the fact that the population is growing steadily is the reason of the environment to change drastically. Water pollution is a direct consequence of the rapid growth of the population on the Earth.
• Materials and the Environment In the contemporary society, the main aspects of the human activities that influence the environment include the processes of manufacturing and the use of the materials.
• Eco-Friendly Food Product Production and Marketing The innovation of the airfryier has not only been a benefit to the health of the people but it also helps in the conservation of the environment.
• Impact of Plastics on the Environment Aquatic animals that feed on fish may mistake plastics for jellyfish and consume them and this may lead to death of such animals.
• Environment and Species in International Relations According to Torgerson: “The environmentalism that came onto the public scene in the late 1960s and early 1970s was part of an outburst of activism in civil society that was followed by the emergence of […]
• The Impact of Industrial Pollution on the Environment The attainment of these higher costs is through compulsory inclusion of the social costs of production in determination of the price of the goods.
• Their Benefits Aside, Human Diets Are Polluting the Environment and Sending Animals to Extinction The fact that the environment and the entire ecosystem have been left unstable in the recent times is in no doubt.
• Urbanization and Environment The resources can be identified through the acquisition of knowledge about the environmental conditions of the areas in which urban development is expected to take place.
• Environmental Ethics: Land Ethic and the Platform of Deep Ecology Attfield defines environmental ethics as the study of ethics of the day to day interactions of human beings with their environment and their impacts on the systems of nature.
• Sea Foods in the Environment Protection Context Further, the purpose of the website is to give information that seeks to reward the efforts of people who protect and safeguard the ocean and seafood supplies such as lobsters.
• Marine Environment Protection and Management in the Shipping Industry Therefore, criminal penalties system in collaboration with the Environmental Protection Agency should reinforce legislations to protect sea creatures and humans from oil pollution or wastes from ships.
• Impacts of Alternative Energy on the Environment The term “alternative energy” refers to energy sources other than fossil fuels, including renewable sources, such as solar and wind energy, as well as nuclear energy.
• A Study of the Brine Shrimps and Their Natural Environment Brine shrimps can be used as environmental indicators and this is because one of the fundamental requirements in the breeding them is a salty environment.
• Lancelets’ Adaptation and Environment The first describable organism in the evolutionary phylogeny of lancelets is the ‘Branchiostoma Lanceolatum’, a molluscan slug of the Limax species.
• Environmental Impact of Livestock Production The implications of the article were concerned with the need to bring the attention of the public to the issue that the livestock sector requires the use of a large number of natural resources while […]
• Kuwait’s Desert Pollution Obviously, the given problem might seem not that important if to observe the general environmental situation of the country, which is extremely close to that of the environmental catastrophe, but as an ordinary citizen, who […]
• Population Growth and Its Impacts on the Environment High population growth is destructive to the society and the environment. In the US and Germany, the rate of population growth is estimated to be 0.
• Water Scarcity and Its Effects on the Environment The core objective of this research paper is to examine water scarcity and its effects to the environment. This is because sufficiency of water supply depends on water conservation methods, distribution channels available in the […]
• The Impact of Green Energy on Environment and Sustainable Development Traditional methods of receiving the necessary amount of power for meeting the needs of the developed cites and industries cannot be discussed as efficient according to the threat of the environmental pollution which is the […]
• Paper Recycling: Environmental and Business Issues In order for paper to be properly recycled, the several types of paper must be separated because the different types of paper must be used for different types of products. This is the most common […]
• Modern State as an Impediment to Environmental Issues This created a lot of hype around the purchase of the product and thus perpetuated the growth of other industries that were insignificant. The greater the consumption levels, the higher the amount of waste produced […]
• Environmental Science: Smart Water Management Among the essential elements in human life is water, which is required for maintaining the water balance in the body and for cleanliness, as well as for many economic sectors, from agriculture to metallurgy.
• Packaging and Protection of Finished Goods and the Environment Moreover, the paper views what concerns the problem creates and identifies preventive measures so as to contribute to the development of safety in the environment and society.
• Microbial-Environmental Interactions in HIV & AIDS The virus manifests in two subtypes, HIV-1 and HIV-2, and the severity of infection depends on the type of viral attack.
• Approaches to the Environmental Ethics The ethical approach Victor expresses is the one that humanity has used for centuries, which made the planet convenient for people, but it also led to the gradual destruction of the environment. The benefit of […]
• Does Recycling Harm the Environment? Recycling is the activity that causes the most damage to the environment. Summarizing the above, it is necessary to state that waste recycling has a negative connotation in relation to nature and the environment.
• Industrial Meat Business and Environmental Issues According to Goodman, it is essential to consider the ethical implications of our food choices and their impact on animals, the environment, and society. By choosing to consume meat, individuals are complicit in the perpetuation […]
• The Environmental Impacts of Exploratory Drilling Overall, the purpose of this report is to identify the environmental impacts of exploratory drilling, the financial benefits of this activity, and the relevant political regulations.
• Globalization in the Environmental Sphere To date, the problem of globalization is relevant, and with it the question of the impact of globalization on the environmental sphere is also of great interest.
• Climate Change, Economy, and Environment Central to the sociological approach to climate change is studying the relationship between the economy and the environment. Another critical area of sociologists ‘ attention is the relationship between inequality and the environment.
• Participatory Action Research on Canada’s Environment This discussion shows that a nationwide recycling PAR is required to combat worries about people’s lack of interest in environmental stewardship to preserve the environment.
• Global Climate Change and Environmental Conservation There may be a significantly lesser possibility that skeptics will acknowledge the facts and implications of climate change, which may result in a lower desire on their part to adopt adaptation. The climate of Minnesota […]
• Environment in the Novel “Ishmael” by Daniel Quinn The arguments made by the gorilla have enabled me to understand that humankind should not be separated and categorized as superior to the rest of living organisms.
• Mining in Canada and Its Environmental Impact The following critique of the article analyzes the author and his qualifications and looks at the article to establish its relevance and quality of research.
• Eco Businesses’ Effect on the Environment Businesses that aim to make a social impact and positively influence the stability of the environment affect people and their minds.
• Environmental Pollution and Human Health The effects of sprawl on health workers are discussed in the article by Pohanka. It is similarly essential to take social justice and fairness into account because the effects of sprawl on population health are […]
• Consumer Relationship With Pro-Environmental Apparel Brands The paper has presented a questionnaire to understand how consumers’ intention to buy from a pro-environmental brand is impacted by their knowledge of the effect of apparel and their overall skepticism toward climate change.
• An Environmental Communicator Profile
• Human Activity: Impact on the Environment
• Genetic and Environmental Impact of the Chornobyl Disaster
• Risk Factor Analysis and Environmental Sustainability
• Negative Environmental Impacts and Solutions
• Environmental Ethics of Pesticide Usage in Agriculture
• Network Organizations and Environmental Processes
• Carbon Offsets: Combatting Environmental Pollution
• The Formation of the Environmental Protection Agency
• Protecting the Environment Against Climate Change
• Environmental Pollution: Waste Landfilling and Open Dumping
• Are Electric Vehicles Better for the Environment?
• Thermodynamics: Application to Environmental Issues
• How Bottles Pollute the Environment
• Environmental Problems in China and Japan
• Exploring Environmental Issues: Marine Ecotourism
• Influence of Technology on Environmental Concerns
• Environmental Legislation in Texas
• Middle East and North Africa Region: Environmental Management
• Is Humanity Already Paying for Environmental Damage?
• Environmental Injustice Impeding Health and Happiness
• Environmental Impact of Wind Farms and Fracking
• The Dangers of Global Warming: Environmental and Economic Collapse
• The Effects of Gold Mining in the Amazons on the Environment and the Population
• Environmental Racism: The Water Crisis in Flint, Michigan
• Environmental Illnesses and Prevention Measures
• Market-Based Approaches to Environmental Law
• Social and Environmental Problems in Oakland and Detroit
• Coates Chemicals: Environmental, Sustainability, and Safety
• Environmental Feedback Loop and Ecological Systems
• A Corporation’s Duties to the Environment
• Demography, Urbanization and Environment
• Environmental Issues, Psychology, and Economics
• Environmental Impacts During Pregnancy
• Attaining Sustainability in the Environment
• Achieving Environmental Sustainability
• Eating Habits and Environmental Worldviews
• Environmental Protection: Pollution and Fossil Fuels
• Environmental Anthropology and Human Survival at The Arctic Biome
• Environmental Problems: Care of the Planet
• Intermodal Transportation Impacts on Environment
• Cats’ and Dogs’ Influences on the Environment and the Ecosystem
• Is Tap Water Better and Safer for People and the Environment Than Bottled Water?
• Nutrition and Its Impact on the Environment
• Environmental Impact Assessment as a Tool of Environmental Justice
• Australia’s State of the Environment
• Environmental Policy’s Impact on Economic Growth
• Business Ethics in Decisions About the Environment
• Environment: Miami Area Analysis
• Agriculture: Environmental, Economic, and Social Aspects
• Toxicity of Mercury: Environmental Health
• The Impact of the Food Industry on the Environment
• The Impact of Atmospheric Pollution on Human Health and the Environment
• Analysis of Culture and Environmental Problems
• Science and the Environment: Plastics and Microplastics
• Impact of the Exxon Valdez Spill on the Environment
• Aeon Company and Environmental Safety
• Impending Environmental Disaster in Van Camp’s “Lying in Bed Together”
• Resolution of International Disputes Related to Environmental Practices
• Environment and the Challenges of Global Governance
• Reducing Personal Impact on the Environment
• Coal Usage – The Effects on Environment and Human Health
• Environmental and Genetic Factors That Influence Health
• Limits on Urban Sprawl. Environmental Science
• Geography and Environmental Features of Machu Picchu
• The Green New Deal: An Environmental Project
• Restorative Environmental Justice and Its Interpretation
• Property Laws Facilitate Environmental Destruction
• Measuring Exposure in Environmental Epidemiology
• Air Cargo Impact on the Environment
• Environmental Marine Ecosystems: Biological Invasions
• Gamma Ray Spectroscopy Analysis of Environmental Samples: a Literature Review
• Environmental and Global Health Issues: Measles
• Fabric Recycling: Environmental Collapse
• Environmental Research – Radon Gas
• Environmental Justice Movement
• Racial Politics of Urban Health and Environmental Justice
• Environmental Discrimination in Canada
• Environmental Worldviews & Environmental Justice
• Flint Water Crisis: Environmental Racism and Racial Capitalism
• Environmental Injustice Among African Americans
• Cancer Alley and Environmental Racism
• Building a School in the Polluted Environment
• India’s Environmental Health and Emergencies
• Climate Change: Sustainability Development and Environmental Law
• Cancer Alley and Environmental Racism in the US
• Environmental Philosophies and Actions
• Bipartisan Strategies for Overcoming Environmental Disaster
• Pope Francis’s Recommendations on Environmental Issues
• Advantages and Disadvantages of Fracking: An Environmental Study
• Non-Govermental Organizations in Environmental Changes
• Green Management and Environmental Auditing
• The Environmental Movement in the US
• Mega-Events and Environmental Sustainability
• Dubai Aluminium Company Ltd: Environmental Policies
• Environmental Science: The Ozone Layer
• The Current Environmental Policy in the USA
• Aspects of Environmental Studies
• The Environment and Its Effects
• Cruise Liners’ Environmental Management and Sustainability
• Environmental Effect & Waste Management Survey
• Great Cities’ Impact on Ecology and Environmental Health
• Geology and Environmental Science
• Environmental Management for Construction Industry
• Airlines and Globalisation: Environmental Impact
• The Business Ethics, Code of Conduct, Environment Initiatives in Companies
• Environmental Features of the Sacramento City
• How “Making It Eco Friendly” Is Related to Information Technology and the Environment
• Coal Seam Gas Industry Impact: Environmental Epidemiology
• A Relationship Between Environmental Disclosure and Environmental Responsiveness
• Environmental Biotechnology: “Analysis of Endocrine Disruption in Southern California Coastal Fish”
• Sustainable Environmental Policy: Fight the Emerging Issues
• Environmental Regulations Effects on Accounting
• Environmental Sustainability of Veja
• Islamic Architecture: Environment and Climate
• Environmental Assessment
• Environmental Law in New South Wales
• Environmental Law: The Aluminium Smelting Plan
• The National Environmental Policy Act
• Environmental Biology: Hydraulic Fracturing Technology
• Environmental Policies Statements Response
• Environmental Accounting in Dubai
• Community Environmental Exposure in Bayou Vista and Omega Bay
• Environmental Audit for the MTBE Plant
• Taking Back Eden: Environmental Law Goes Global
• Environmental Risk Report on Nanoparticles
• UAE Laws and Regulations for Environmental Protection
• Reaction Paper: Valuing the Environment Through Contingent Valuation
• Environmental Geotechnics: Review
• Environmental Challenges Caused by Fossil Fuels
• Water for Environmental Health and Promotion
• Environmental Management ISO 14000- ENEN90005 EMS Manual for Sita Landfill
• National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
• Environmental Impact of Healthcare Facilities
• Environmental Law: Strategies and Issue of Standing
• Environmental Protection: Law and Policy
• Environmental Law: History, Sources, Treaties and Setbacks
• Environmental Microbiology Overview
• Environmental Noise Effects on Students of Oregon State University
• Australian Environmental Law
• Environmental Issues of Rwanda
• Environment and Land Conflict in Brazil
• The Information Context and the Formation of Public Response on Environmental Issues
• Australian Fires and Their Environmental Impact
• The Environment Conditions in the Desert
• Purchasing Trees Online for Environmental Protection
• Water Scarcity: Industrial Projects of Countries That Affect the External Environment
• Rayon and Its Impact on Health and Environment
• Opportunity Cost and Environment Protection
• Advanced Environmental Recycling Technologies Analysis
• Environmental Studies: Climate Changes
• Environmental Degradation in “Turning Tides” by Mathieu D’Astous
• Global Warming: Negative Effects to the Environment
• Environmental Planning: Dam Construction
• Agriculture and Environment: Organic Foods
• Environmental Protection With Energy Saving Tools
• Environmental Politics Review and Theories
• Social Development: Globalization and Environmental Problems
• Macondo Well Blowout’s Environmental Assessment
• Sheffield Flooding and Environmental Issues Involved
• Do India and China Have a Right to Pollute the Environment?
• Global Warming and Environmental Refugees
• Influence of Car Emissions on the Environment
• Environmental Ethics Concerning Animal Rights
• The Politics of Climate Change, Saving the Environment
• Environmental Deterioration and Poverty in Kenya
• Global Warming Issues Review and Environmental Sustainability
• Environmental Issue: Whaling
• Impact of Mobile Telephony on the Environment
• How to Feed Everybody and Protect the Environment?
• Geographical Information System (GIS) in Environmental Impact Assessment
• Population Grows And Environment
• Human Population Ecology: Human Interaction With the Environment
• Environmental Policies Made by the Finland Government
• War in Modern World: Effects on the Environment
• The Influence of Global Warming and Pollution on the Environment
• Genes and Environment: Genetic Factors and Issues Analysis
• Human Impacts on the Environment
• US Government and Environmental Concerns
• Florida Wetlands: Importance to the Health of the Environment
• Environmental Issue in Canada: Kyoto Protocol
• Environmental Preferences and Oil Development in Alaska
• Environmental Problems From Human Overpopulation
• Aboriginal Environmental Issues in Canada
• Environmental Sociology. Capitalism and the Environment
• Genes, Lifestyle, and Environment in Health of Population
• Los Angeles International Airport’s Environmental Impacts
• Environmental Policy: Water Sanitation
• U.S. Environmental Policies: The Clean Air Act
• Pollution and Federal Environmental Policy
• Fossil Fuel Combustion and Federal Environmental Policy
• The Impact of Mining Companies on Environment
• Capitalism and Its Influence on the Environment
• Emiratis Perceptions of Environmental and Cultural Conservation
• Shipping and the Environment
• Environmental Security in Gulf Council Countries
• Environmental Pollution Analysis
• Preserving the Environment and Its Treasures
• Humans and Humanists: Ethics and the Environment
• Mosquito Control Strategies in the Urban Environment
• Relationship Between Population and the Environment
• Energy, Its Usage and the Environment
• Carbon Dioxide Environmental Effects in 1990- 2010
• Hydropower Dams and Their Environmental Impacts
• Fiji Water’ Environmental Effects
• Coal Pollution in China as an Environmental Problem
• Natural Storms and Environmental Studies
• Environmental Perils: Climate Change Issue
• Mining and Environment in Australia and South Africa
• Social and Eco-Entrepreneurship for Environment
• Health and Environment in Abu Dhabi: Graphs’ Description
• Environment Quality and Tourism in Chinese Cities
• Health and Environment in Abu Dhabi: Statistical Significance
• Plastic Reusable Bags for Green Environment
• “Population & Environment” in Mazur’s Feminist Approach
• Environmental Pollution and Increased Birds Death
• Fuel Cell Vehicles Preventing Environmental Hazards
• Grundfos: Environment and Society Results
• Environmental Pollution in the Petroleum Industry
• Precautionary Principle in Environmental Situations
• The Impact of Overpopulation on the Global Environment
• Papua New Guinea Environmental Analysis
• Environmental Issue: Hunting on Whales
• Impact of Sea Transport on the Aquatic Environment
• Animal Testing and Environmental Protection
• Green Building: The Impact of Humanity on the Environment
• Global Warming: People Impact on the Environment
• Information Technology and Environment Sustainability
• Environmental Pollution and Green Policies
• Human & Environment in Kimmerer’s & Austin’s Works
• Dioxins and Furans in Japan’s Environment
• Open-Pit Mining Environmental Impact
• Environment and Business in “Bidder 70” Documentary
• Hunting, Its Moral and Environmental Issues
• Pure Home Water Company’s Environment
• Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill’s Environmental Effect
• Water Cycle and Environmental Factors
• Green Marketing and Environment
• Environmental Risks in the United Arab Emirates
• Environmental Laws in the UAE
• Reverse Logistics and the Environment
• US Position on International Environmental Concerns
• Environmental Ethics and International Policy
• Rail Transportation Industry Environmental Impacts
• Globalization as to Health, Society, Environment
• Pollution & Climate Change as Environmental Risks
• Human Behavioral Effects on Environment
• Data Analysis in Economics, Sociology, Environment
• America’s Major Environmental Challenges
• Environmental Studies: Energy Wastefulness in the UAE
• Environmental Risk Management in the UAE
• Business and Its Environment: Greenhouse Emissions
• The US Foreign Policy and Environmental Protection
• Contrasting Environmental Policies in Brazil
• Air Pollution Effects on the Health and Environment
• How Does Environmental Security Affect Sustainable Development?
• Environmental Sustainability in Clean City Organization
• Gene-Environment Interaction Theory
• Environment: Tropical Deforestation Causes in Indonesia
• Hydraulic Fracturing and Its Environmental Impacts
• Nuclear Power & Environment
• How Solar Energy Can Save the Environment?
• Overpopulation Effects on the Environment
• Environmental Studies: Artificial Leaf
• Environmental Studies: Green Technology
• “Global Environment History” a Book by Ian G. Simmons
• Environmental Studies: Photosynthesis Concept
• Environment Destruction: Pollution
• Big Coal and the Natural Environment Pollution
• The Aral Sea’s Environmental Issues
• Externalities Effects on People and Environment
• Environment Protection Agency Technical Communication
• Maori Health Development and Environmental Issue
• Mars: Water and the Martian Landscape
• Greenbelts as a Toronto’ Environmental Planning Tool
• Environmental Studies: The Florida Everglades
• Solving Complex Environmental Problems
• Environmental Impacts of Cruise Tourism
• Environmental Studies: Saving Endangered Species
• Environmental Stewardship of Deforestation
• Environmental Problem of the Ok Tedi Copper Mine
• Environmental Studies: Transforming Cultures From Consumerism to Sustainability
• Assaults on the Environment as a Form of War or Violence
• Brazil Environmental Issues
• Environmental Impact – Life Cycle Assessment
• Environmental Hazards and Human Health
• Saving the Environment With Eco-Friendly Amenities
• The Adoption of Agenda 21 of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
• Air Pollution: Human Influence on Environment
• The Sustainable Hotel Environment
• Analysis of Love Canal Environmental Disaster
• Global Warming and Its Effects on the Environment
• Environmental Issue – Climate Change
• Health and Environment in Abu Dhabi
• The Effects of Human Activities on the Environment
• Environmental Protection: Liquid Waste
• Environmental Security as an Approach to Threats Posed by Global Environmental Change
• Noise Control Act of 1972
• World Bank’s Transformation of Human-Environmental Relations in the Global South
• Culture and Leadership in a Safe Industrial Environment
• Environmental Conditions in Tunnels Towards Environmentally Sustainable Future
• Changes and Challenges: China’s Environmental Management in Transition
• Water and Environment Engineering
• Corporate Environmental Policy Statements in Mainland China: To What Extent Do They Conform to ISO 14000 Documentation?
• Jiangsu Province Environmental Analysis
• Science in Environmental Management
• Quality and Environmental Management
• Emirates Airlines Environmental Consciousness
• Knowledge Management Assessment in Environment Agency-Abu Dhabi
• Environmental Issues and Management
• Green Computing: A Contribution to Save the Environment
• Environmental Studies: Life Cycle Analysis of Milk
• Working for the Environment
• Environmental Protection Agency and Transportation Standards
• Environmental Damage From the BP Oil Spill
• Environmental Sustainability Audit: The Oman Environmental Services Holding Company
• A Robust Strategy for Sustainable Energy
• Chesapeake Bay Environment Protection
• Environmental Disasters and Ways Companies Cope With Them
• The Concept of Corporate Environmental Responsibility
• Environmental Policy in UK, Canada, and India
• Effects of Conflict or Nuclear Materials on Environment and Society
• MLC and the Environmental Management Accounting
• Environmental Degradation in Lithgow’s Waters
• Evaluate Human Resource Issues in Hong Kong Food and Environmental Hygiene Department
• On the Rescue Mission: Preserving the Environment
• A Cost Benefit Analysis of the Environmental and Economic Effects of Nuclear Energy in the United States
• Reducing the Energy Costs in Hotels: An Attempt to Take Care of the Environment
• The International Relations Theories in Addressing of Environmental Issues
• Learning of Environment Sustainability in Education
• Natural and the Environmental Protection
• Silent Spring and Environmental Issues
• The Environment, Resources, and Their Economic Effects
• Carbon Taxes in Environmental Protection
• Coyotes as an Environmental Concern in Southern California
• Fossil Energy and Economy
• Eliminating the Conflict: Tourism and Environment
• Tourism and Environment in Conflict
• The Effect of Genetically Modified Food on Society and Environment
• The Effect of Nuclear Energy on the Environment
• Wind Energy for Environmental Sustainability
• Concept of Environmental Ethic in Society
• The Needs of People and the Needs of the Environment
• Effects of Oil Spills on Aquatic Environments
• Current Environmental Health Issues
• Environmental Impacts of Nuclear Material
• The Trends, Opportunities and Challenges of Environmental Sustainability
• 21st Century Environmental Perils
• Human Impact on the Environment
• Human Interaction With the Surrounding Environment
• The Relationship Between Psychology and the Preservation of the Environment
• Environmental Injustice in Modern World
• Effects of Classical Body to Environmental Thought
• Thailand Issues: Environment, Child Prostitution, and HIV/AIDS
• Environmentalism and Economic Freedom
• Environmental Defense Fund
• Identity: Discourse of Environment
• Bottled Water Effect on Environment and Culture
• Environmental Issues of Yucca Mountain Nuclear Storage Facility in Nevada
• Corporate Responsibility to the Environment
• Gas Drilling Project: Economics and Environment
• Population Growth and the Distribution of Human Populations to Effects on the Environment
• The Environmental Impact of Nuclear Energy
• Human Population and Global Resources
• Causes of Water Pollution and the Present Environmental Solution
• Environmental Issues in Asia
• Environmental Pollution in Canada
• Obligation of Corporations in Environmental Conservation
• Expanding Oil Refinery: Environmental and Health Effects
• Environmental Justice Issues Affecting African Americans: Water Pollution
• Urban Sprawl and Environmental and Social Problems
• Problem of Nature – Environment Degradation
• Impact of Full Moon Party on Environment
• Written Analysis of Acid in the Environment: Lessons Learned and Future Prospects
• Genetically Modified Foods and Environment
• Is Genetically Modified Food Safe for Human Bodies and the Environment?
• Environment, Disease and Crime in Egypt
• United National Environment Programme (UNEP)
• The Problem of Environmental Degradation in Modern World
• Green Buildings Impact on the Environment
• Toulmin Model Argument About the Environment
• Understanding and Attitude Towards Environment: Course Document Review
• The History and Theory of Historic Preservation and Environmental Conservation
• Consequences of the Disposal of Medical Wastes on the Environment Abstract
• Environmental Management: Green Taxes
• Mercury: Environmental Concerns and Economic Value
• Effects of Global Warming on the Environment
• The Effect of Polymers on Environment vs Glass
• Would Evolution Proceed More Quickly in a Rapidly Changing Environment?
• Who Must Take Care of the Environment?
• Why Can Air Pollution Harm the Environment Dramatically?
• Why and How Should We Account for the Environment?
• Why Animals Change Their Colors in Response to Environment?
• Why Don’t Languages Adapt to Their Environment?
• Why Are Environmental Ethics Important in the Preservation of the Natural Environment?
• Why Are Industrial Farms Good for the Environment?
• Why Is Mountain Meadows Basin Very Important for the Environment?
• Why Do People Harm the Environment Although They Try to Treat It Well?
• Why Do People Use Their Cars While the Built Environment Imposes Cycling?
• Why Protecting, Our Environment, Is So Important?
• Why Need to Study the Environment?
• Why the Oil Industry Continues to Harm the Environment?
• Why Is Population Growth’s Effect on the Earth’s Environment?
• Can Cleaner Environment Promote International Trade?
• Can Ecolabeling Schemes Preserve the Environment?
• Can Employment Structure Promote Environment-Biased Technical Progress?
• Can Green Taxes Save the Environment?
• Can Social Media Help Save the Environment?
• Can the Market Take Care of the Environment?
• Can the United States Help Improve Their Perishing Environment?
• Which Human Activities Affected the Natural Environment of the Amazon Basin?
• What Are Our Responsibilities Toward the Environment?
• What Are Plastics, and How Do They Affect the Environment?
• What Are Some Ways That the Environment Affects Human Health?
• What Are the Effects of Acid Rain on the Environment?
• What Are the Effects of Motor Vehicles on the Environment?
• How Has Consumerism Shaped the Environment by Influencing?
• How Does Crude Oil Pollute Environment?
• Water Pollution Research Topics
• Environmentalism Essay Topics
• Landfill Essay Titles
• Ecosystem Essay Topics
• Hazardous Waste Essay Topics
• Pollution Essay Ideas
• Climate Change Titles
• Global Issues Essay Topics
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, November 30). 612 Environment Essay Topics & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/environment-essay-examples/

"612 Environment Essay Topics & Examples." IvyPanda , 30 Nov. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/environment-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2023) '612 Environment Essay Topics & Examples'. 30 November.

IvyPanda . 2023. "612 Environment Essay Topics & Examples." November 30, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/environment-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "612 Environment Essay Topics & Examples." November 30, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/environment-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "612 Environment Essay Topics & Examples." November 30, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/environment-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

• Basic site functions
• Ensuring secure, safe transactions
• Secure account login
• Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
• Remembering privacy and security settings
• Analyzing site traffic and usage
• Personalized search, content, and recommendations
• Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

• Remembering general and regional preferences
• Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

Environmental Ethics

Environmental ethics is the discipline in philosophy that studies the moral relationship of human beings to, and also the value and moral status of, the environment and its nonhuman contents. This entry covers: (1) the challenge of environmental ethics to the anthropocentrism (i.e., human-centeredness) embedded in traditional western ethical thinking; (2) the early development of the discipline in the 1960s and 1970s; (3) the connection of deep ecology, feminist environmental ethics, and social ecology to politics; (4) the attempt to apply traditional ethical theories, including consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics, to support contemporary environmental concerns; and (5) the focus of environmental literature on wilderness, and possible future developments of the discipline.

1. Introduction: The Challenge of Environmental Ethics

2. the early development of environmental ethics, 3.1 deep ecology, 3.2 feminism and the environment, 3.3 disenchantment and the new animism, 3.4 social ecology and bioregionalism, 4. traditional ethical theories and contemporary environment ethics, 5. wilderness, the built environment, poverty and politics, 6. pathologies of environmental crisis: theories and empirical research, bibliography, other internet resources, related entries.

Suppose that putting out natural fires, culling feral animals or destroying some individual members of overpopulated indigenous species is necessary for the protection of the integrity of a certain ecosystem. Will these actions be morally permissible or even required? Is it morally acceptable for farmers in non-industrial countries to practise slash and burn techniques to clear areas for agriculture? Consider a mining company which has performed open pit mining in some previously unspoiled area. Does the company have a moral obligation to restore the landform and surface ecology? And what is the value of a humanly restored environment compared with the originally natural environment? It is often said to be morally wrong for human beings to pollute and destroy parts of the natural environment and to consume a huge proportion of the planet's natural resources. If that is wrong, is it simply because a sustainable environment is essential to (present and future) human well-being? Or is such behaviour also wrong because the natural environment and/or its various contents have certain values in their own right so that these values ought to be respected and protected in any case? These are among the questions investigated by environmental ethics. Some of them are specific questions faced by individuals in particular circumstances, while others are more global questions faced by groups and communities. Yet others are more abstract questions concerning the value and moral standing of the natural environment and its nonhuman components.

In the literature on environmental ethics the distinction between instrumental value and intrinsic value (meaning “non-instrumental value”) has been of considerable importance. The former is the value of things as means to further some other ends, whereas the latter is the value of things as ends in themselves regardless of whether they are also useful as means to other ends. For instance, certain fruits have instrumental value for bats who feed on them, since feeding on the fruits is a means to survival for the bats. However, it is not widely agreed that fruits have value as ends in themselves. We can likewise think of a person who teaches others as having instrumental value for those who want to acquire knowledge. Yet, in addition to any such value, it is normally said that a person, as a person, has intrinsic value, i.e., value in his or her own right independently of his or her prospects for serving the ends of others. For another example, a certain wild plant may have instrumental value because it provides the ingredients for some medicine or as an aesthetic object for human observers. But if the plant also has some value in itself independently of its prospects for furthering some other ends such as human health, or the pleasure from aesthetic experience, then the plant also has intrinsic value. Because the intrinsically valuable is that which is good as an end in itself, it is commonly agreed that something's possession of intrinsic value generates a prima facie direct moral duty on the part of moral agents to protect it or at least refrain from damaging it (see O'Neil 1992 and Jameson 2002 for detailed accounts of intrinsic value).

Many traditional western ethical perspectives, however, are anthropocentric or human-centered in that either they assign intrinsic value to human beings alone (i.e., what we might call anthropocentric in a strong sense) or they assign a significantly greater amount of intrinsic value to human beings than to any nonhuman things such that the protection or promotion of human interests or well-being at the expense of nonhuman things turns out to be nearly always justified (i.e., what we might call anthropocentric in a weak sense). For example, Aristotle ( Politics , Bk. 1, Ch. 8) maintains that “nature has made all things specifically for the sake of man” and that the value of nonhuman things in nature is merely instrumental. Generally, anthropocentric positions find it problematic to articulate what is wrong with the cruel treatment of nonhuman animals, except to the extent that such treatment may lead to bad consequences for human beings. Immanuel Kant (“Duties to Animals and Spirits”, in Lectures on Ethics ), for instance, suggests that cruelty towards a dog might encourage a person to develop a character which would be desensitized to cruelty towards humans. From this standpoint, cruelty towards nonhuman animals would be instrumentally, rather than intrinsically, wrong. Likewise, anthropocentrism often recognizes some non-intrinsic wrongness of anthropogenic (i.e. human-caused) environmental devastation. Such destruction might damage the well-being of human beings now and in the future, since our well-being is essentially dependent on a sustainable environment (see Passmore 1974, Bookchin 1990, Norton, Hutchins, Stevens, and Maple (eds.) 1995).

When environmental ethics emerged as a new sub-discipline of philosophy in the early 1970s, it did so by posing a challenge to traditional anthropocentrism. In the first place, it questioned the assumed moral superiority of human beings to members of other species on earth. In the second place, it investigated the possibility of rational arguments for assigning intrinsic value to the natural environment and its nonhuman contents.

It should be noted, however, that some theorists working in the field see no need to develop new, non-anthropocentric theories. Instead, they advocate what may be called enlightened anthropocentrism (or, perhaps more appropriately called, prudential anthropocentrism). Briefly, this is the view that all the moral duties we have towards the environment are derived from our direct duties to its human inhabitants. The practical purpose of environmental ethics, they maintain, is to provide moral grounds for social policies aimed at protecting the earth's environment and remedying environmental degradation. Enlightened anthropocentrism, they argue, is sufficient for that practical purpose, and perhaps even more effective in delivering pragmatic outcomes, in terms of policy-making, than non-anthropocentric theories given the theoretical burden on the latter to provide sound arguments for its more radical view that the nonhuman environment has intrinsic value (cf. Norton 1991, de Shalit 1994, Light and Katz 1996). Furthermore, some prudential anthropocentrists may hold what might be called cynical anthropocentrism, which says that we have a higher-level anthropocentric reason to be non-anthropocentric in our day-to-day thinking. Suppose that a day-to-day non-anthropocentrist tends to act more benignly towards the nonhuman environment on which human well-being depends. This would provide reason for encouraging non-anthropocentric thinking, even to those who find the idea of non-anthropocentric intrinsic value hard to swallow. In order for such a strategy to be effective one may need to hide one's cynical anthropocentrism from others and even from oneself.

Although nature was the focus of much nineteenth and twentieth century philosophy, contemporary environmental ethics only emerged as an academic discipline in the 1970s. The questioning and rethinking of the relationship of human beings with the natural environment over the last thirty years reflected an already widespread perception in the 1960s that the late twentieth century faced a “population time bomb” and a serious environmental crisis. Among the accessible work that drew attention to a sense of crisis was Rachel Carson's Silent Spring (1963), which consisted of a number of essays earlier published in the New Yorker magazine detailing how pesticides such as DDT, aldrin and deildrin concentrated through the food web. Commercial farming practices aimed at maximizing crop yields and profits, Carson speculates, are capable of impacting simultaneously on environmental and public health.

On the other hand, historian Lynn White jr., in a much-cited essay published in 1967 (White 1967) on the historical roots of the environmental crisis, argues that the main strands of Judeo-Christian thinking had encouraged the overexploitation of nature by maintaining the superiority of humans over all other forms of life on earth, and by depicting all of nature as created for the use of humans. White's thesis is widely discussed in theology, history, and has been subject to some sociological testing as well as being regularly discussed by philosophers (see Whitney 1993, Attfield 2001). Central to the rationale for his thesis were the works of the Church Fathers and The Bible itself, supporting the anthropocentric perspective that humans are the only things that matter on Earth. Consequently, they may utilize and consume everything else to their advantage without any injustice. For example, Genesis 1:27-8 states: “God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over fish of the sea, and over fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” Likewise, Thomas Aquinas ( Summa Contra Gentiles , Bk. 3, Pt 2, Ch 112) argued that nonhuman animals are “ordered to man's use”. According to White, the Judeo-Christian idea that humans are created in the image of the transcendent supernatural God, who is radically separate from nature, also by extension radically separates humans themselves from nature. This ideology further opened the way for untrammelled exploitation of nature. Modern Western science itself, White argues, was “cast in the matrix of Christian theology” so that it too inherited the “orthodox Christian arrogance toward nature” (White jr. 1967, 1207). Clearly, without technology and science, the environmental extremes to which we are now exposed would probably not be realized. White's thesis, however, is that given the modern form of science and technology, Judeo-Christianity itself provides the original deep-seated drive to unlimited exploitation of nature. Nevertheless, White argued that some minority traditions within Christianity (e.g., the views of St. Francis) might provide an antidote to the “arrogance” of a mainstream tradition steeped in anthropocentrism.

Around the same time, the Stanford ecologist, Paul Ehrlich, published The Population Bomb (1968), warning that the growth of human population threatened the viability of planetary life-support systems. The sense of environmental crisis stimulated by those and other popular works was intensified by NASA's production and wide dissemination of a particularly potent image of earth from space taken at Christmas 1968 and featured in the Scientific American in September 1970. Here, plain to see, was a living, shining planet voyaging through space and shared by all of humanity, a precious vessel vulnerable to pollution and to the overuse of its limited capacities. In 1972 a team of researchers at MIT led by Dennis Meadows published the Limits to Growth study, a work that summed up in many ways the emerging concerns of the previous decade and the sense of vulnerability triggered by the view of the earth from space. In §10 of the commentary to the study, the researchers wrote:

We affirm finally that any deliberate attempt to reach a rational and enduring state of equilibrium by planned measures, rather than by chance or catastrophe, must ultimately be founded on a basic change of values and goals at individual, national and world levels.

The call for a “basic change of values” in connection to the environment (a call that could be interpreted in terms of either instrumental or intrinsic values) reflected a need for the development of environmental ethics as a new sub-discipline of philosophy.

The new field emerged almost simultaneously in three countries -- the United States, Australia, and Norway. In the first two of these countries, direction and inspiration largely came from the earlier twentieth century American literature of the environment. For instance, the Scottish emigrant John Muir (founder of the Sierra Club and “father of American conservation”) and subsequently the forester Aldo Leopold had advocated an appreciation and conservation of things “natural, wild and free”. Their concerns were motivated by a combination of ethical and aesthetic responses to nature as well as a rejection of crudely economic approaches to the value of natural objects (a historical survey of the confrontation between Muir's reverentialism and the human-centred conservationism of Gifford Pinchot (one of the major influences on the development of the US Forest Service) is provided in Norton 1991; also see Cohen 1984 and Nash (ed) 1990). Leopold's A Sand County Almanac (1949), in particular, advocated the adoption of a “land ethic”:

That land is a community is the basic concept of ecology, but that land is to be loved and respected is an extension of ethics. (vii-ix) A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise. (224-5)

However, Leopold himself provided no systematic ethical theory or framework to support these ethical ideas concerning the environment. His views therefore presented a challenge and opportunity for moral theorists: could some ethical theory be devised to justify the injunction to preserve the integrity, stability and beauty of the biosphere?

The land ethic sketched by Leopold, attempting to extend our moral concern to cover the natural environment and its nonhuman contents, was drawn on explicitly by the Australian philosopher Richard Routley (later Sylvan). According to Routley (1973 (cf. Routley and Routley 1980)), the anthropocentrism imbedded in what he called the “dominant western view”, or “the western superethic”, is in effect “human chauvinism”. This view, he argued, is just another form of class chauvinism, which is simply based on blind class “loyalty” or prejudice, and unjustifiably discriminates against those outside the privileged class. Furthermore, in his “last man” (and “last people”) arguments, Routley asked us to imagine the hypothetical situation in which the last person, surviving a world catastrophe, acted to ensure the elimination of all other living things and the destruction of all the landscapes after his demise. From the human-chauvinistic (or absolutely anthropocentric) perspective, the last person would do nothing morally wrong, since his or her destructive act in question would not cause any damage to the interest and well-being of humans, who would by then have disappeared. Nevertheless, Routley points out that there is a moral intuition that the imagined last act would be morally wrong. An explanation for this judgment, he argued, is that those nonhuman objects in the environment, whose destruction is ensured by the last person, have intrinsic value, a kind of value independent of their usefulness for humans. From his critique, Routley concluded that the main approaches in traditional western moral thinking were unable to allow the recognition that natural things have intrinsic value, and that the tradition required overhaul of a significant kind.

Leopold's idea that the “land” as a whole is an object of our moral concern also stimulated writers to argue for certain moral obligations toward ecological wholes, such as species, communities, and ecosystems, not just their individual constituents. The U.S.-based theologian and environmental philosopher Holmes Rolston III, for instance, argued that species protection was a moral duty (Rolston 1975). It would be wrong, he maintained, to eliminate a rare butterfly species simply to increase the monetary value of specimens already held by collectors. Like Routley's “last man” arguments, Rolston's example is meant to draw attention to a kind of action that seems morally dubious and yet is not clearly ruled out or condemned by traditional anthropocentric ethical views. Species, Rolston went on to argue, are intrinsically valuable and are usually more valuable than individual specimens, since the loss of a species is a loss of genetic possibilities and the deliberate destruction of a species would show disrespect for the very biological processes which make possible the emergence of individual living things (also see Rolston 1989, Ch 10). Natural processes deserve respect, according to Rolston's quasi-religious perspective, because they constitute a nature (or God) which is itself intrinsically valuable (or sacred).

Meanwhile, the work of Christopher Stone (a professor of law at the University of Southern California) had become widely discussed. Stone (1972) proposed that trees and other natural objects should have at least the same standing in law as corporations. This suggestion was inspired by a particular case in which the Sierra Club had mounted a challenge against the permit granted by the U.S. Forest Service to Walt Disney Enterprises for surveys preparatory to the development of the Mineral King Valley, which was at the time a relatively remote game refuge, but not designated as a national park or protected wilderness area. The Disney proposal was to develop a major resort complex serving 14000 visitors daily to be accessed by a purpose-built highway through Sequoia National Park. The Sierra Club, as a body with a general concern for wilderness conservation, challenged the development on the grounds that the valley should be kept in its original state for its own sake.

Stone reasoned that if trees, forests and mountains could be given standing in law then they could be represented in their own right in the courts by groups such as the Sierra Club. Moreover, like any other legal person , these natural things could become beneficiaries of compensation if it could be shown that they had suffered compensatable injury through human activity. When the case went to the U.S. Supreme Court, it was determined by a narrow majority that the Sierra Club did not meet the condition for bringing a case to court, for the Club was unable and unwilling to prove the likelihood of injury to the interest of the Club or its members. In a dissenting minority judgment, however, justices Douglas, Blackmun and Brennan mentioned Stone's argument: his proposal to give legal standing to natural things, they said, would allow conservation interests, community needs and business interests to be represented, debated and settled in court.

Reacting to Stone's proposal, Joel Feinberg (1974) raised a serious problem. Only items that have interests, Feinberg argued, can be regarded as having legal standing and, likewise, moral standing. For it is interests which are capable of being represented in legal proceedings and moral debates. This same point would also seem to apply to political debates. For instance, the movement for “animal liberation”, which also emerged strongly in the 1970s, can be thought of as a political movement aimed at representing the previously neglected interests of some animals (see Regan and Singer (eds.) 1976, Clark 1977, and also the entry on the moral status of animals ). Granted that some animals have interests that can be represented in this way, would it also make sense to speak of trees, forests, rivers, barnacles, or termites as having interests of a morally relevant kind? This issue was hotly contested in the years that followed. Meanwhile, John Passmore (1974) argued, like White, that the Judeo-Christian tradition of thought about nature, despite being predominantly “despotic”, contained resources for regarding humans as “stewards” or “perfectors” of God's creation. Skeptical of the prospects for any radically new ethic, Passmore cautioned that traditions of thought could not be abruptly overhauled. Any change in attitudes to our natural surroundings which stood the chance of widespread acceptance, he argued, would have to resonate and have some continuities with the very tradition which had legitimized our destructive practices. In sum, then, Leopold's land ethic, the historical analyses of White and Passmore, the pioneering work of Routley, Stone and Rolston, and the warnings of scientists, had by the late 1970s focused the attention of philosophers and political theorists firmly on the environment.

The confluence of ethical, political and legal debates about the environment, the emergence of philosophies to underpin animal rights activism and the puzzles over whether an environmental ethic would be something new rather than a modification or extension of existing ethical theories were reflected in wider social and political movements. The rise of environmental or “green” parties in Europe in the 1980s was accompanied by almost immediate schisms between groups known as “realists” versus “fundamentalists” (see Dobson 1992). The “realists” stood for reform environmentalism, working with business and government to soften the impact of pollution and resource depletion especially on fragile ecosystems or endangered species. The “fundies” argued for radical change, the setting of stringent new priorities, and even the overthrow of capitalism and liberal individualism, which were taken as the major ideological causes of anthropogenic environmental devastation. (Not that collectivist or communist countries do better in terms of their environmental record (see Dominick 1998).)

Underlying these political disagreements was the distinction between “shallow” and “deep” environmental movements, a distinction introduced in the early 1970s by another major influence on contemporary environmental ethics, the Norwegian philosopher and climber Arne Næss. Since the work of Næss has been significant in environmental politics, the discussion of his position is given in a separate section below.

3. Environmental Ethics and Politics

“Deep ecology” was born in Scandinavia, the result of discussions between Næss and his colleagues Sigmund Kvaløy and Nils Faarlund (see Næss 1973 and 1989; also see Witoszek and Brennan (eds.) 1999 for a historical survey and commentary on the development of deep ecology). All three shared a passion for the great mountains. On a visit to the Himalayas, they became impressed with aspects of “Sherpa culture” particularly when they found that their Sherpa guides regarded certain mountains as sacred and accordingly would not venture onto them. Subsequently, Næss formulated a position which extended the reverence the three Norwegians and the Sherpas felt for mountains to other natural things in general.

The “shallow ecology movement”, as Næss (1973) calls it, is the “fight against pollution and resource depletion”, the central objective of which is “the health and affluence of people in the developed countries.” The “deep ecology movement”, in contrast, endorses “biospheric egalitarianism”, the view that all living things are alike in having value in their own right, independent of their usefulness to others. The deep ecologist respects this intrinsic value, taking care, for example, when walking on the mountainside not to cause unnecessary damage to the plants.

Inspired by Spinoza's metaphysics, another key feature of Næss's deep ecology is the rejection of atomistic individualism. The idea that a human being is such an individual possessing a separate essence, Næss argues, radically separates the human self from the rest of the world. To make such a separation not only leads to selfishness towards other people, but also induces human selfishness towards nature. As a counter to egoism at both the individual and species level, Næss proposes the adoption of an alternative relational “total-field image” of the world. According to this relationalism, organisms (human or otherwise) are best understood as “knots” in the biospherical net. The identity of a living thing is essentially constituted by its relations to other things in the world, especially its ecological relations to other living things. If people conceptualise themselves and the world in relational terms, the deep ecologists argue, then people will take better care of nature and the world in general.

As developed by Næss and others, the position also came to focus on the possibility of the identification of the human ego with nature. The idea is, briefly, that by identifying with nature I can enlarge the boundaries of the self beyond my skin. My larger -- ecological -- Self (the capital “S” emphasizes that I am something larger than my body and consciousness), deserves respect as well. To respect and to care for my Self is also to respect and to care for the natural environment, which is actually part of me and with which I should identify. “Self-realization”, in other words, is the reconnection of the shriveled human individual with the wider natural environment. Næss maintains that the deep satisfaction that we receive from identification with nature and close partnership with other forms of life in nature contributes significantly to our life quality. (One clear historical antecedent to this kind of nature spiritualism is the romanticism of Jean-Jacques Rousseau as expressed in his last work, the Reveries of the Solitary Walker )

When Næss's view crossed the Atlantic, it was sometimes merged with ideas emerging from Leopold's land ethic (see Devall and Sessions 1985; also see Sessions (ed) 1995). But Næss -- wary of the apparent totalitarian political implications of Leopold's position that individual interests and well-being should be subordinated to the holistic good of the earth's biotic community (see section 4 below) -- has always taken care to distance himself from advocating any sort of “land ethic”. (See Anker 1999 for cautions on interpreting Næss's relationalism as an endorsement of the kind of holism displayed in the land ethic, cf, Grey 1993). Some critics have argued that Næss's deep ecology is no more than an extended social-democratic version of utilitarianism, which counts human interests in the same calculation alongside the interests of all natural things (e.g., trees, wolves, bears, rivers, forests and mountains) in the natural environment (see Witoszek 1997). However, Næss failed to explain in any detail how to make sense of the idea that oysters or barnacles, termites or bacteria could have interests of any morally relevant sort at all. Without an account of this, Næss's early “biospheric egalitarianism” -- that all living things whatsoever had a similar right to live and flourish -- was an indeterminate principle in practical terms. It also remains unclear in what sense rivers, mountains and forests can be regarded as possessors of any kind of interests. This is an issue on which Næss has always remained elusive.

Biospheric egalitarianism was modified in the 1980s to the weaker claim that the flourishing of both human and non-human life have value in themselves. At the same time, Næss declared that his own favoured ecological philosophy -- “Ecosophy T”, as he called it after his Tvergastein mountain cabin -- was only one of several possible foundations for an environmental ethic. Deep ecology ceased to be a specific doctrine, but instead became a “platform”, of eight simple points, on which Næss hoped all deep green thinkers could agree. The platform was conceived as establishing a middle ground, between underlying philosophical orientations, whether Christian, Buddhist, Daoist, process philosophy, or whatever, and the practical principles for action in specific situations, principles generated from the underlying philosophies. Thus the deep ecological movement became explicitly pluralist (see Brennan 1999; c.f. Light 1996).

While Næss's Ecosophy T sees human Self-realization as a solution to the environmental crises resulting from human selfishness and exploitation of nature, some of the followers of the deep ecology platform in the United States and Australia further argue that the expansion of the human self to include nonhuman nature is supported by the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory, which is said to have dissolved the boundaries between the observer and the observed (see Fox 1984, 1990, and Devall and Sessions 1985; cf. Callicott 1985). These "relationalist" developments of deep ecology are, however, criticized by some feminist theorists. The idea of nature as part of oneself, one might argue, could justify the continued exploitation of nature instead. For one is presumably more entitled to treat oneself in whatever ways one likes than to treat another independent agent in whatever ways one likes. According to some feminist critics, the deep ecological theory of the “expanded self” is in effect a disguised form of human colonialism, unable to give nature its due as a genuine “other” independent of human interest and purposes (see Plumwood 1993, Ch. 7, 1999, and Warren 1999).

Meanwhile, some third-world critics have accused deep ecology of being elitist in its attempts to preserve wilderness experiences for only a select group of economically and socio-politically well-off people. The Indian writer Ramachandra Guha (1989, 1999) for instance, depicts the activities of many western-based conservation groups as a new form of cultural imperialism, aimed at securing converts to conservationism (cf. Bookchin 1987 and Brennan 1998a). “Green missionaries”, as Guha calls them, represent a movement aimed at further dispossessing the world's poor and indigenous people. “Putting deep ecology in its place,” he writes, “is to recognize that the trends it derides as “shallow” ecology might in fact be varieties of environmentalism that are more apposite, more representative and more popular in the countries of the South.” Although Næss himself repudiates suggestions that deep ecology is committed to any imperialism (see Witoszek and Brennan (eds.) 1999, Ch. 36-7 and 41), Guha's criticism raises important questions about the application of deep ecological principles in different social, economic and cultural contexts. Finally, in other critiques, deep ecology is portrayed as having an inconsistent utopian vision (see Anker and Witoszek 1998).

Broadly speaking, a feminist issue is any that contributes in some way to understanding the oppression of women. Feminist theories attempt to analyze women's oppression, its causes and consequences, and suggest strategies and directions for women's liberation. By the mid 1970s, feminist writers had raised the issue of whether patriarchal modes of thinking encouraged not only widespread inferiorizing and colonizing of women, but also of people of colour, animals and nature. Sheila Collins (1974), for instance, argued that male-dominated culture or patriarchy is supported by four interlocking pillars: sexism, racism, class exploitation, and ecological destruction.

Emphasizing the importance of feminism to the environmental movement and various other liberation movements, some writers, such as Ynestra King (1989a and 1989b), argue that the domination of women by men is historically the original form of domination in human society, from which all other hierarchies -- of rank, class, and political power -- flow. For instance, human exploitation of nature may be seen as a manifestation and extension of the oppression of women, in that it is the result of associating nature with the female, which had been already inferiorized and oppressed by the male-dominating culture. But within the plurality of feminist positions, other writers, such as Val Plumwood (1993), understand the oppression of women as only one of the many parallel forms of oppression sharing and supported by a common ideological structure, in which one party (the colonizer, whether male, white or human) uses a number of conceptual and rhetorical devices to privilege its interests over that of the other party (the colonized: whether female, people of colour, or animals). Facilitated by a common structure, seemingly diverse forms of oppression can mutually reinforce each other (Warren 1987, 1990, 1994, Cheney 1989, and Plumwood 1993).

Not all feminist theorists would call that common underlying oppressive structure “androcentric” or “patriarchal”. But it is generally agreed that core features of the structure include “dualism”, hierarchical thinking, and the “logic of domination”, which are typical of, if not essential to, male-chauvinism. These patterns of thinking and conceptualizing the world, many feminist theorists argue, also nourish and sustain other forms of chauvinism, including, human-chauvinism (i.e., anthropocentrism), which is responsible for much human exploitation of, and destructiveness towards, nature. The dualistic way of thinking, for instance, sees the world in polar opposite terms, such as male/female, masculinity/femininity, reason/emotion, freedom/necessity, active/passive, mind/body, pure/soiled, white/coloured, civilized/primitive, transcendent/immanent, human/animal, culture/nature. Furthermore, under dualism all the first items in these contrasting pairs are assimilated with each other, and all the second items are likewise linked with each other. For example, the male is seen to be associated with the rational, active, creative, Cartesian human mind, and civilized, orderly, transcendent culture; whereas the female is regarded as tied to the emotional, passive, determined animal body, and primitive, disorderly, immanent nature. These interlocking dualisms are not just descriptive dichotomies, according to the feminists, but involve a prescriptive privileging of one side of the opposed items over the other. Dualism confers superiority to everything on the male side, but inferiority to everything on the female side. The “logic of domination” then dictates that those on the superior side (e.g., men, rational beings, humans) are morally entitled to dominate and utilize those on the inferior side (e.g., women, beings lacking in rationality, nonhumans) as mere means.

The problem with dualistic and hierarchical modes of thinking, however, is not just that that they are epistemically unreliable. It is not just that the dominating party often falsely sees the dominated party as lacking (or possessing) the allegedly superior (or inferior) qualities, or that the dominated party often internalizes false stereotypes of itself given by its oppressors, or that stereotypical thinking often overlooks salient and important differences among individuals. More important, according to feminist analyses, the very premise of prescriptive dualism -- the valuing of attributes of one polarized side and the devaluing of those of the other, the idea that domination and oppression can be justified by appealing to attributes like masculinity, rationality, being civilized or developed, etc. -- is itself problematic.

Feminism represents a radical challenge for environmental thinking, politics, and traditional social ethical perspectives. It promises to link environmental questions with wider social problems concerning various kinds of discrimination and exploitation, and fundamental investigations of human psychology. However, whether there are conceptual, causal or merely contingent connections among the different forms of oppression and liberation remains a contested issue (see Green 1994). The term “ecofeminism” (first coined by Françoise d'Eaubonne in 1974) or “ecological feminism” was for a time generally applied to any view that combines environmental advocacy with feminist analysis. However, because of the varieties of, and disagreements among, feminist theories, the label may be too wide to be informative and has generally fallen from use.

An often overlooked source of ecological ideas is the work of the neo-Marxist Frankfurt School of critical theory founded by Max Horkheimer and Theodore Adorno (Horkheimer and Adorno 1969). While classical Marxists regard nature as a resource to be transformed by human labour and utilized for human purposes, Horkheimer and Adorno saw Marx himself as representative of the problem of “human alienation”. At the root of this alienation, they argue, is a narrow positivist conception of rationality -- which sees rationality as an instrument for pursuing progress, power and technological control, and takes observation, measurement and the application of purely quantitative methods to be capable of solving all problems. Such a positivistic view of science combines determinism with optimism. Natural processes as well as human activities are seen to be predictable and manipulable. Nature (and, likewise, human nature) is no longer mysterious, uncontrollable, or fearsome. Instead, it is reduced to an object strictly governed by natural laws, which therefore can be studied, known, and employed to our benefit. By promising limitless knowledge and power, the positivism of science and technology not only removes our fear of nature, the critical theorists argue, but also destroys our sense of awe and wonder towards it. That is to say, positivism “disenchants” nature -- along with everything that can be studied by the sciences, whether natural, social or human.

The progress in knowledge and material well-being may not be a bad thing in itself, where the consumption and control of nature is a necessary part of human life. However, the critical theorists argue that the positivistic disenchantment of natural things (and, likewise, of human beings -- because they too can be studied and manipulated by science) disrupts our relationship with them, encouraging the undesirable attitude that they are nothing more than things to be probed, consumed and dominated. According to the critical theorists, the oppression of “outer nature” (i.e., the natural environment) through science and technology is bought at a very high price: the project of domination requires the suppression of our own “inner nature” (i.e., human nature) – e.g., human creativity, autonomy, and the manifold needs, vulnerabilities and longings at the centre of human life. To remedy such an alienation, the project of Horkheimer and Adorno is to replace the narrow positivistic and instrumentalist model of rationality with a more humanistic one, in which the values of the aesthetic, moral, sensuous and expressive aspects of human life play a central part. Thus, their aim is not to give up our rational faculties or powers of analysis and logic. Rather, the ambition is to arrive at a dialectical synthesis between Romanticism and Enlightenment, to return to anti-deterministic values of freedom, spontaneity and creativity.

In his later work, Adorno advocates a re-enchanting aesthetic attitude of “sensuous immediacy” towards nature. Not only do we stop seeing nature as primarily, or simply, an object of consumption, we are also able to be directly and spontaneously acquainted with nature without interventions from our rational faculties. According to Adorno, works of art, like natural things, always involve an “excess”, something more than their mere materiality and exchange value (see Vogel 1996, ch. 4.4 for a detailed discussion of Adorno's views on art, labour and domination). The re-enchantment of the world through aesthetic experience, he argues, is also at the same time a re-enchantment of human lives and purposes. Adorno's work remains largely unexplored in mainstream environmental philosophy, although the idea of applying critical theory (embracing techniques of deconstruction, psychoanalysis and radical social criticism) to both environmental issues and the writings of various ethical and political theorists has spawned an emerging field of "ecocritique" or "eco-criticism" (Vogel 1996, Luke 1997, van Wyk 1997, Dryzek 1997).

Some students of Adorno's work have recently argued that his account of the role of “sensuous immediacy” can be understood as an attempt to defend a “legitimate anthropomorphism” that comes close to a weak form of animism (Bernstein 2001, 196). Others, more radical, have claimed to take inspiration from his notion of “non-identity”, which, they argue, can be used as the basis for a deconstruction of the notion of nature and perhaps even its elimination from eco-critical writing. For example, Timothy Morton argues that “putting something called Nature on a pedestal and admiring it from afar does for the environment what patriarchy does for the figure of Woman. It is a paradoxical act of sadistic admiration” (Morton 2007, 5), and that “in the name of all that we value in the idea of ‘nature’, [ecocritique] thoroughly examines how nature is set up as a transcendental, unified, independent category. Ecocritique does not think that it is paradoxical to say, in the name of ecology itself: ‘down with nature!’ ” (ibid., 13).

It remains to be seen, however, whether the radical attempt to purge the concept of nature from eco-critical work meets with success. Likewise, it is unclear whether the dialectic project on which Horkheimer and Adorno embarked is coherent, and whether Adorno, in particular, has a consistent understanding of “nature” and “rationality” (see Eckersley 1992 and Vogel 1996, for a review of the Frankfurt School's thinking about nature).

On the other hand, the new animists have been much inspired by the serious way in which some indigenous peoples placate and interact with animals, plants and inanimate things through ritual, ceremony and other practices. According to the new animists, the replacement of traditional animism (the view that personalized souls are found in animals, plants, and other material objects) by a form of disenchanting positivism directly leads to an anthropocentric perspective, which is accountable for much human destructiveness towards nature. In a disenchanted world, there is no meaningful order of things or events outside the human domain, and there is no source of sacredness or dread of the sort felt by those who regard the natural world as peopled by divinities or demons (Stone 2006). When a forest is no longer sacred, there are no spirits to be placated and no mysterious risks associated with clear-felling it. A disenchanted nature is no longer alive. It commands no respect, reverence or love. It is nothing but a giant machine, to be mastered to serve human purposes. The new animists argue for reconceptualizing the boundary between persons and non-persons. For them, “living nature” comprises not only humans, animals and plants, but also mountains, forests, rivers, deserts, and even planets.

Whether the notion that a mountain or a tree is to be regarded as a person is taken literally or not, the attempt to engage with the surrounding world as if it consists of other persons might possibly provide the basis for a respectful attitude to nature (see Harvey 2005 for a popular account of the new animism). If disenchantment is a source of environmental problems and destruction, then the new animism can be regarded as attempting to re-enchant, and help to save, nature. More poetically, David Abram has argued that a phenomenological approach of the kind taken by Merleau-Ponty can reveal to us that we are part of the “common flesh” of the world, that we are in a sense the world thinking itself (Abram 1995).

In her recent work, Freya Mathews has tried to articulate a version of animism or panpsychism that captures ways in which the world (not just nature) contains many kinds of consciousness and sentience. For her, there is an underlying unity of mind and matter in that the world is a “self-realizing” system containing a multiplicity of other such systems (cf. Næss). According to Mathews, we are meshed in communication, and potential communication, with the “One” (the greater cosmic self) and its many lesser selves (Mathews 2003, 45 - 60). Materialism (the monistic theory that the world consists purely of matter), she argues, is self-defeating by encouraging a form of “collective solipsism” that treats the world either as unknowable or as a social-construction (Mathews 2005, 12). Mathews also takes inspiration from her interpretation of the core Daoist idea of wuwei as “letting be” and bringing about change through “effortless action”. The focus in environmental management, development and commerce should be on “synergy” with what is already in place rather than on demolition, replacement and disruption. Instead of bulldozing away old suburbs and derelict factories, the synergistic panpsychist sees these artefacts as themselves part of the living cosmos, hence part of what is to be respected. Likewise, instead of trying to eliminate feral or exotic plants and animals, and restore environments to some imagined pristine state, ways should be found—wherever possible—to promote synergies between the newcomers and the older native populations in ways that maintain ecological flows and promote the further unfolding and developing of ecological processes (Mathews 2004). Panpsychism, Mathews argues, frees us from the “ideological grid of capitalism”, can reduce our desire for consumer novelties, and can allow us and the world to grow old together with grace and dignity.

In summary, if disenchantment is a source of environmentally destructive or uncaring attitudes, then both the aesthetic and the animist/panpsychist re-enchantment of the world are intended to offer an antidote to such attitudes, and perhaps also inspirations for new forms of managing and designing for sustainability.

Apart from feminist-environmentalist theories and Næss's deep ecology, Murray Bookchin's “social ecology” has also claimed to be radical, subversive, or countercultural (see Bookchin 1980, 1987, 1990). Bookchin's version of critical theory takes the “outer” physical world as constituting what he calls “first nature”, from which culture or “second nature” has evolved. Environmentalism, on his view, is a social movement, and the problems it confronts are social problems. While Bookchin is prepared, like Horkheimer and Adorno, to regard (first) nature as an aesthetic and sensuous marvel, he regards our intervention in it as necessary. He suggests that we can choose to put ourselves at the service of natural evolution, to help maintain complexity and diversity, diminish suffering and reduce pollution. Bookchin's social ecology recommends that we use our gifts of sociability, communication and intelligence as if we were “nature rendered conscious”, instead of turning them against the very source and origin from which such gifts derive. Exploitation of nature should be replaced by a richer form of life devoted to nature's preservation.

John Clark has argued that social ecology is heir to a historical, communitarian tradition of thought that includes not only the anarchist Peter Kropotkin, but also the nineteenth century socialist geographer Elisée Reclus, the eccentric Scottish thinker Patrick Geddes and the latter's disciple, Lewis Mumford (Clark 1998). Ramachandra Guha has described Mumford as “the pioneer American social ecologist” (Guha 1996, 210). Mumford adopted a regionalist perspective, arguing that strong regional centres of culture are the basis of “active and securely grounded local life” (Mumford 1944, 403). Like the pessimists in critical theory, Mumford was worried about the emergence under industrialised capitalism of a “megamachine”, one that would oppress and dominate human creativity and freedom, and one that -- despite being a human product -- operates in a way that is out of our control. While Bookchin is more of a technological optimist than Mumford, both writers have inspired a regional turn in environmental thinking. Bioregionalism gives regionalism an environmental twist. This is the view that natural features should provide the defining conditions for places of community, and that secure and satisfying local lives are led by those who know a place, have learned its lore and who adapt their lifestyle to its affordances by developing its potential within ecological limits. Such a life, the bioregionalists argue, will enable people to enjoy the fruits of self-liberation and self-development (see the essays in List 1993, and the book-length treatment in Thayer 2003, for an introduction to bioregional thought).

However, critics have asked why natural features should significant in defining the places in which communities are to be built, and have puzzled over exactly which natural features these should be -- geological, ecological, climatic, hydrological, and so on (see Brennan 1998b). If relatively small, bioregional communities are to be home to flourishing human societies, then a question also arises over the nature of the laws and punishments that will prevail in them, and also of their integration into larger regional and global political and economic groupings. For anarchists and other critics of the predominant social order, a return to self-governing and self-sufficient regional communities is often depicted as liberating and refreshing. But for the skeptics, the worry remains that the bioregional vision is politically over-optimistic and is open to the establishment of illiberal, stifling and undemocratic communities. Further, given its emphasis on local self-sufficiency and the virtue of life in small communities, a question arises over whether bioregionalism is workable in an overcrowded planet.

Deep ecology, feminism, and social ecology have had a considerable impact on the development of political positions in regard to the environment. Feminist analyses have often been welcomed for the psychological insight they bring to several social, moral and political problems. There is, however, considerable unease about the implications of critical theory, social ecology and some varieties of deep ecology and animism. Some recent writers have argued, for example, that critical theory is bound to be ethically anthropocentric, with nature as no more than a “social construction” whose value ultimately depends on human determinations (see Vogel 1996). Others have argued that the demands of “deep” green theorists and activists cannot be accommodated within contemporary theories of liberal politics and social justice (see Ferry 1998). A further suggestion is that there is a need to reassess traditional theories such as virtue ethics, which has its origins in ancient Greek philosophy (see the following section) within the context of a form of stewardship similar to that earlier endorsed by Passmore (see Barry 1999). If this last claim is correct, then the radical activist need not, after all, look for philosophical support in radical, or countercultural, theories of the sort deep ecology, feminism, bioregionalism and social ecology claim to be.

Although environmental ethicists often try to distance themselves from the anthropocentrism embedded in traditional ethical views (Passmore 1974, Norton 1991 are exceptions), they also quite often draw their theoretical resources from traditional ethical systems and theories. Consider the following two basic moral questions: (1) What kinds of thing are intrinsically valuable, good or bad? (2) What makes an action right or wrong?

Consequentialist ethical theories consider intrinsic “value” / “disvalue” or “goodness” / “badness” to be more fundamental moral notions than “rightness” / “wrongness”, and maintain that whether an action is right/wrong is determined by whether its consequences are good/bad. From this perspective, answers to question (2) are informed by answers to question (1). For instance, utilitarianism, a paradigm case of consequentialism, regards pleasure (or, more broadly construed, the satisfaction of interest, desire, and/or preference) as the only intrinsic value in the world, whereas pain (or the frustration of desire, interest, and/or preference) the only intrinsic disvalue, and maintains that right actions are those that would produce the greatest balance of pleasure over pain.

As the utilitarian focus is the balance of pleasure and pain as such, the question of to whom a pleasure or pain belongs is irrelevant to the calculation and assessment of the rightness or wrongness of actions. Hence, the eighteenth century utilitarian Jeremy Bentham (1789), and now Peter Singer (1993), have argued that the interests of all the sentient beings (i.e., beings who are capable of experiencing pleasure or pain) -- including nonhuman ones -- affected by an action should be taken equally into consideration in assessing the action. Furthermore, rather like Routley (see section 2 above), Singer argues that the anthropocentric privileging of members of the species Homo sapiens is arbitrary, and that it is a kind of “speciesism” as unjustifiable as sexism and racism. Singer regards the animal liberation movement as comparable to the liberation movements of women and people of colour. Unlike the environmental philosophers who attribute intrinsic value to the natural environment and its inhabitants, Singer and utilitarians in general attribute intrinsic value to the experience of pleasure or interest satisfaction as such, not to the beings who have the experience. Similarly, for the utilitarian, non-sentient objects in the environment such as plant species, rivers, mountains, and landscapes, all of which are the objects of moral concern for environmentalists, are of no intrinsic but at most instrumental value to the satisfaction of sentient beings (see Singer 1993, Ch. 10). Furthermore, because right actions, for the utilitarian, are those that maximize the overall balance of interest satisfaction over frustration, practices such as whale-hunting and the killing of an elephant for ivory, which cause suffering to nonhuman animals, might turn out to be right after all: such practices might produce considerable amounts of interest-satisfaction for human beings, which, on the utilitarian calculation, outweigh the nonhuman interest-frustration involved. As the result of all the above considerations, it is unclear to what extent a utilitarian ethic can also be an environmental ethic. This point may not so readily apply to a wider consequentialist approach, which attributes intrinsic value not only to pleasure or satisfaction, but also to various objects and processes in the natural environment.

Deontological ethical theories, in contrast, maintain that whether an action is right or wrong is for the most part independent of whether its consequences are good or bad. From the deontologist perspective, there are several distinct moral rules or duties (e.g., “not to kill or otherwise harm the innocent”, “not to lie”, “to respect the rights of others”, “to keep promises”), the observance/violation of which is intrinsically right/wrong; i.e., right/wrong in itself regardless of consequences. When asked to justify an alleged moral rule, duty or its corresponding right, deontologists may appeal to the intrinsic value of those beings to whom it applies. For instance, “animal rights” advocate Tom Regan (1983) argues that those animals with intrinsic value (or what he calls “inherent value”) have the moral right to respectful treatment, which then generates a general moral duty on our part not to treat them as mere means to other ends. We have, in particular, a prima facie moral duty not to harm them. Regan maintains that certain practices (such as sport or commercial hunting, and experimentation on animals) violate the moral right of intrinsically valuable animals to respectful treatment. Such practices, he argues, are intrinsically wrong regardless of whether or not some better consequences ever flow from them. Exactly which animals have intrinsic value and therefore the moral right to respectful treatment? Regan's answer is: those that meet the criterion of being the “subject-of-a-life”. To be such a subject is a sufficient (though not necessary) condition for having intrinsic value, and to be a subject-of-a-life involves, among other things, having sense-perceptions, beliefs, desires, motives, memory, a sense of the future, and a psychological identity over time.

Some authors have extended concern for individual well-being further, arguing for the intrinsic value of organisms achieving their own good, whether those organisms are capable of consciousness or not. Paul Taylor's version of this view (1981 and 1986), which we might call biocentrism , is a deontological example. He argues that each individual living thing in nature -- whether it is an animal, a plant, or a micro-organism -- is a “teleological-center-of-life” having a good or well-being of its own which can be enhanced or damaged, and that all individuals who are teleological-centers-of life have equal intrinsic value (or what he calls “inherent worth”) which entitles them to moral respect. Furthermore, Taylor maintains that the intrinsic value of wild living things generates a prima facie moral duty on our part to preserve or promote their goods as ends in themselves, and that any practices which treat those beings as mere means and thus display a lack of respect for them are intrinsically wrong. A more recent and biologically detailed defence of the idea that living things have representations and goals and hence have moral worth is found in Agar 2001. Unlike Taylor's egalitarian and deontological biocentrism, Robin Attfield (1987) argues for a hierarchical view that while all beings having a good of their own have intrinsic value, some of them (e.g., persons) have intrinsic value to a greater extent. Attfield also endorses a form of consequentialism which takes into consideration, and attempts to balance, the many and possibly conflicting goods of different living things (also see Varner 1998 for a more recent defense of biocentric individualism with affinities to both consequentialist and deontological approaches). However, some critics have pointed out that the notion of biological good or well-being is only descriptive not prescriptive (see Williams 1992 and O'Neill 1993, Ch. 2). For instance, the fact that HIV has a good of its own does not mean that we ought to assign any positive moral weight to the realization of that good.

Note that the ethics of animal liberation or animal rights and biocentrism are both individualistic in that their various moral concerns are directed towards individuals only -- not ecological wholes such as species, populations, biotic communities, and ecosystems. None of these is sentient, a subject-of-a-life, or a teleological-center-of-life, but the preservation of these collective entities is a major concern for many environmentalists. Moreover, the goals of animal liberationists, such as the reduction of animal suffering and death, may conflict with the goals of environmentalists. For example, the preservation of the integrity of an ecosystem may require the culling of feral animals or of some indigenous populations that threaten to destroy fragile habitats. So there are disputes about whether the ethics of animal liberation is a proper branch of environmental ethics (see Callicott 1980, 1988, Sagoff 1984, Jamieson 1998, Crisp 1998 and Varner 2000).

Criticizing the individualistic approach in general for failing to accommodate conservation concerns for ecological wholes, J. Baird Callicott (1980) has advocated a version of land-ethical holism which takes Leopold's statement “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise” to be the supreme deontological principle. In this theory, the earth's biotic community per se is the sole locus of intrinsic value, whereas the value of its individual members is merely instrumental and dependent on their contribution to the “integrity, stability, and beauty” of the larger community. A straightforward implication of this version of the land ethic is that an individual member of the biotic community ought to be sacrificed whenever that is needed for the protection of the holistic good of the community. For instance, Callicott maintains that if culling a white-tailed deer is necessary for the protection of the holistic biotic good, then it is a land-ethical requirement to do so. But, to be consistent, the same point also applies to human individuals because they are also members of the biotic community. Not surprisingly, the misanthropy implied by Callicott's land-ethical holism has been widely criticized and regarded as a reductio of the position (see Aiken (1984), Kheel (1985), Ferré (1996), and Shrader-Frechette (1996)). Tom Regan (1983, p.362), for example, has condemned the holistic land ethic's disregard of the rights of the individual as “environmental fascism”. Under the pressure from the charge of ecofascism and misanthropy, Callicott (1989 Ch. 5, and 1999, Ch. 4) has later revised his position and now maintains that the biotic community (indeed, any community to which we belong) as well as its individual members (indeed, any individual who shares with us membership in some common community) all have intrinsic value. The controversy surrounding Callicott's original position, however, has inspired efforts in environment ethics to investigate possibilities of attributing intrinsic value to ecological wholes, not just their individual constituent parts (see Lo 2001 for an overview and critique of Callicott's changing position over the last two decades; also see Ouderkirk and Hill (eds.) 2002 for debates between Callicott and others concerning the metaethical and metaphysical foundations for the land ethic and also its historical antecedents). Following in Callicott's footsteps, and inspired by Næss's relational account of value, Warwick Fox in his most recent work has championed a theory of “responsive cohesion” which apparently gives supreme moral priority to the maintenance of ecosystems and the biophysical world (Fox 2007). It remains to be seen if this position will escape the charges of misanthropy and totalitarianism laid against earlier holistic and relational theories of value.

Individual natural entities (whether sentient or not, living or not), Andrew Brennan (1984) argues, are not designed by anyone to fulfill any purpose and therefore lack “intrinsic function” (i.e., the function of a thing that constitutes part of its essence or identity conditions). This, he proposes, is a reason for thinking that individual natural entities should not be treated as mere instruments, and thus a reason for assigning them intrinsic value. Furthermore, he argues that the same moral point applies to the case of natural ecosystems, to the extent that they lack intrinsic function. In the light of Brennan's proposal, Eric Katz (1991 and 1997) argues that all natural entities, whether individuals or wholes, have intrinsic value in virtue of their ontological independence from human purpose, activity, and interest, and maintains the deontological principle that nature as a whole is an “autonomous subject” which deserves moral respect and must not be treated as a mere means to human ends. Carrying the project of attributing intrinsic value to nature to its ultimate form, Robert Elliot (1997) argues that naturalness itself is a property in virtue of possessing which all natural things, events, and states of affairs, attain intrinsic value. Furthermore, Elliot argues that even a consequentialist, who in principle allows the possibility of trading off intrinsic value from naturalness for intrinsic value from other sources, could no longer justify such kind of trade-off in reality. This is because the reduction of intrinsic value due to the depletion of naturalness on earth, according to him, has reached such a level that any further reduction of it could not be compensated by any amount of intrinsic value generated in other ways, no matter how great it is.

As the notion of “natural” is understood in terms of the lack of human contrivance and is often opposed to the notion of “artifactual”, one much contested issue is about the value of those parts of nature that have been interfered with by human artifice -- for instance, previously degraded natural environments which have been humanly restored. Based on the premise that the properties of being naturally evolved and having a natural continuity with the remote past are “value adding” (i.e., adding intrinsic value to those things which possess those two properties), Elliot argues that even a perfectly restored environment would necessarily lack those two value-adding properties and therefore be less valuable than the originally undegraded natural environment. Katz, on the other hand, argues that a restored nature is really just an artifact designed and created for the satisfaction of human ends, and that the value of restored environments is merely instrumental. However, some critics have pointed out that advocates of moral dualism between the natural and the artifactual run the risk of diminishing the value of human life and culture, and fail to recognize that the natural environments interfered with by humans may still have morally relevant qualities other than pure naturalness (see Lo 1999). Two other issues central to this debate are that the key concept “natural” seems ambiguous in many different ways (see Hume 1751, App. 3, and Brennan 1988, Ch. 6, Elliot 1997, Ch. 4), and that those who argue that human interference reduces the intrinsic value of nature seem to have simply assumed the crucial premise that naturalness is a source of intrinsic value. Some thinkers maintain that the natural, or the “wild” construed as that which “is not humanized” (Hettinger and Throop 1999, p. 12) or to some degree “not under human control” (ibid., p. 13) is intrinsically valuable. Yet, as Bernard Williams points out (Williams 1992), we may, paradoxically, need to use our technological powers to retain a sense of something not being in our power. The retention of wild areas may thus involve planetary and ecological management to maintain, or even “imprison” such areas (Birch 1990), raising a question over the extent to which national parks and wilderness areas are free from our control. An important message underlying the debate, perhaps, is that even if ecological restoration is achievable, it might have been better to have left nature intact in the first place.

As an alternative to consequentialism and deontology both of which consider “thin” concepts such as “goodness” and “rightness” as essential to morality, virtue ethics proposes to understand morality -- and assess the ethical quality of actions -- in terms of “thick” concepts such as “kindness”, “honesty”, “sincerity” and “justice”. As virtue ethics speaks quite a different language from the other two kinds of ethical theory, its theoretical focus is not so much on what kinds of things are good/bad, or what makes an action right/wrong. Indeed, the richness of the language of virtues, and the emphasis on moral character, is sometimes cited as a reason for exploring a virtues-based approach to the complex and always-changing questions of sustainability and environmental care (Sandler 2007). One question central to virtue ethics is what the moral reasons are for acting one way or another. For instance, from the perspective of virtue ethics, kindness and loyalty would be moral reasons for helping a friend in hardship. These are quite different from the deontologist's reason (that the action is demanded by a moral rule) or the consequentialist reason (that the action will lead to a better over-all balance of good over evil in the world). From the perspective of virtue ethics, the motivation and justification of actions are both inseparable from the character traits of the acting agent. Furthermore, unlike deontology or consequentialism the moral focus of which is other people or states of the world, one central issue for virtue ethics is how to live a flourishing human life, this being a central concern of the moral agent himself or herself. “Living virtuously” is Aristotle's recipe for flourishing. Versions of virtue ethics advocating virtues such as “benevolence”, “piety”, “filiality”, and “courage”, have also been held by thinkers in the Chinese Confucian tradition. The connection between morality and psychology is another core subject of investigation for virtue ethics. It is sometimes suggested that human virtues, which constitute an important aspect of a flourishing human life, must be compatible with human needs and desires, and perhaps also sensitive to individual affection and temperaments. As its central focus is human flourishing as such, virtue ethics may seem unavoidably anthropocentric and unable to support a genuine moral concern for the nonhuman environment. But just as Aristotle has argued that a flourishing human life requires friendships and one can have genuine friendships only if one genuinely values, loves, respects, and cares for one's friends for their own sake, not merely for the benefits that they may bring to oneself, some have argued that a flourishing human life requires the moral capacities to value, love, respect, and care for the nonhuman natural world as an end in itself (see O'Neill 1992, O'Neill 1993, Barry 1999).

Despite the variety of positions in environmental ethics developed over the last thirty years, they have focused mainly on issues concerned with wilderness and the reasons for its preservation (see Callicott and Nelson 1998 for a collection of essays on the ideas and moral significance of wilderness). The importance of wilderness experience to the human psyche has been emphasized by many environmental philosophers. Næss, for instance, urges us to ensure we spend time dwelling in situations of intrinsic value, whereas Rolston seeks “re-creation” of the human soul by meditating in the wilderness. Likewise, the critical theorists believe that aesthetic appreciation of nature has the power to re-enchant human life.

By contrast, relatively little attention has been paid to the built environment, although this is the one in which most people spend most of their time. In post-war Britain, for example, cheaply constructed new housing developments were often poor replacements for traditional communities. They have been associated with lower amounts of social interaction and increased crime compared with the earlier situation. The destruction of highly functional high-density traditional housing, indeed, might be compared with the destruction of highly diverse ecosystems and biotic communities. Likewise, the loss of the world's huge diversity of natural languages has been mourned by many, not just professionals with an interest in linguistics. Urban and linguistic environments are just two of the many “places” inhabited by humans. Some philosophical theories about natural environments and objects have potential to be extended to cover built environments and non-natural objects of several sorts (see King 2000, Light 2001, Palmer 2003, while Fox 2007 aims to include both built and natural environments in the scope of a single ethical theory). Certainly there are many parallels between natural and artificial domains: for example, many of the conceptual problems involved in discussing the restoration of natural objects also appear in the parallel context of restoring human-made objects.

The focus on the value of wilderness and the importance of its preservation has overlooked another important problem – namely that lifestyles in which enthusiasms for nature rambles, woodland meditations or mountaineering can be indulged demand a standard of living that is far beyond the dreams of most of the world’s population. Moreover, mass access to wild places would likely destroy the very values held in high esteem by the “natural aristocrats”, a term used by Hugh Stretton (1976) to characterize the environmentalists “driven chiefly by love of the wilderness”. Thus, a new range of moral and political problems open up, including the environmental cost of tourist access to wilderness areas, and ways in which limited access could be arranged to areas of natural beauty and diversity, while maintaining the individual freedoms central to liberal democracies.

Lovers of wilderness sometimes consider the high human populations in some developing countries as a key problem underlying the environmental crisis. Rolston (1996), for instance, claims that (some) humans are a kind of planetary “cancer”. He maintains that while “feeding people always seems humane, ... when we face up to what is really going on, by just feeding people, without attention to the larger social results, we could be feeding a kind of cancer.” This remark is meant to justify the view that saving nature should, in some circumstances, have a higher priority than feeding people. But such a view has been criticized for seeming to reveal a degree of misanthropy, directed at those human beings least able to protect and defend themselves (see Attfield 1998, Brennan 1998a). The empirical basis of Rolston's claims has been queried by work showing that poor people are often extremely good environmental managers (Martinez-Alier 2002). Guha's worries about the elitist and “missionary” tendencies of some kinds of deep green environmentalism in certain rich western countries can be quite readily extended to theorists such as Rolston (Guha 1999). Can such an apparently elitist sort of wilderness ethics ever be democratised? How can the psychically-reviving power of the wild become available to those living in the slums of Calcutta or Sao Paolo? These questions so far lack convincing answers.

Furthermore, the economic conditions which support the kind of enjoyment of wilderness by Stretton's “natural aristocrats”, and more generally the lifestyles of many people in the affluent countries, seem implicated in the destruction and pollution which has provoked the environmental turn in the first place. For those in the richer countries, for instance, engaging in outdoor recreations usually involves the motor car. Car dependency, however, is at the heart of many environmental problems, a key factor in urban pollution, while at the same time central to the economic and military activities of many nations and corporations, for example securing and exploiting oil reserves. In an increasingly crowded industrialised world, the answers to such problems are pressing. Any adequate study of this intertwined set of problems must involve interdisciplinary collaboration among philosophers and theorists in the social as well as the natural sciences.

Connections between environmental destruction, unequal resource consumption, poverty and the global economic order have been discussed by political scientists, development theorists, geographers and economists as well as by philosophers. Links between economics and environmental ethics are particularly well established. Work by Mark Sagoff (1988), for instance, has played a major part in bringing the two fields together. He argues that “as citizens rather than consumers” people are concerned about values, which cannot plausibly be reduced to mere ordered preferences or quantified in monetary terms (also see Shrader-Frechette 1987, O'Neill 1993, and Brennan 1995). The potentially misleading appeal to economic reason used to justify the expansion of the corporate sector has also come under critical scrutiny by globalisation theorists (see Korten 1999). These critiques do not aim to eliminate economics from environmental thinking; rather, they resist any reductive, and strongly anthropocentric, tendency to believe that all social and environmental problems are fundamentally or essentially economic.

Other interdisciplinary approaches link environmental ethics with biology, policy studies, public administration, political theory, cultural history, post-colonial theory, literature, geography, and human ecology (for some examples, see Norton, Hutchins, Stevens, Maple 1995, Shrader-Frechette 1984, Gruen and Jamieson (eds.) 1994, Karliner 1997, Diesendorf and Hamilton 1997, Schmidtz and Willott 2002). Many of the more recent assessments of issues concerned with biodiversity, ecosystem health, poverty, environmental justice and sustainability look at both human and environmental issues, eschewing in the process commitment either to a purely anthropocentric or purely ecocentric perspective (see Hayward and O'Neill 1997, and Dobson 1999 for collections of essays looking at the links between sustainability, justice, welfare and the distribution of environmental goods). The future development of environmental ethics depend on these, and other interdisciplinary synergies, as much as on its anchorage within philosophy.

Part of environmental philosophy's project since its inception is the diagnosis of the origins of our present-day environmental extremities. The best known of these is probably Lynn White's theory. As seen in section 2 above, White argues that Judæo-Christian monotheism, because of its essentially anthropocentric attitude towards nature, is the ideological source of the modern environmental crisis. At the heart of his philosophical cum cultural-historical analysis seems to be a simple structure:

W1. Christianity leads to anthropocentrism. W2. Anthropocentrism leads to environmentally damaging behaviours. W3. So, Christianity is the origin of environmental crisis.

The second premise of White's argument also seems to have a central place in a number of rival diagnoses. In fact, the structure of the major theories in the field is regularly of this sort: (1) X leads to anthropocentrism, (2) anthropocentrism leads to environmentally damaging behaviours; therefore (3) X is the origin of environmental crisis. Three other well-known cases have already been discussed (section 3 above), namely: ecofeminism (which identifies X with those patterns of thought that are characteristically patriarchal), deep ecology (which takes X to be atomistic individualism), and the new animism (which regards the disenchantment of nature as the X -factor).

The four theories all seem to have one view in common: that anthropocentrism is at the heart of the problem of environmental destructiveness. If anthropocentrism is the problem, then perhaps non-anthropocentrism is the solution. At this point, it may be helpful to separate two theses of non-anthropocentrism, ones that are not normally distinguished in the literature:

The evaluative thesis (of non-anthropocentrism) is the claim that natural nonhuman things have intrinsic value, i.e., value in their own right independent of any use they have for others. The psycho-behavioural thesis (of non-anthropocentrism) is the claim that people who believe in the evaluative thesis of non-anthropocentrism are more likely to behave environmentally (i.e., behave in beneficial ways, or at least not in harmful ways, towards the environment) than those who do not.

Much of the last three decades of environmental ethics has been spent analysing, clarifying and examining the evaluative thesis of non-anthropocentrism, which has now achieved a nearly canonical status within the discipline. By contrast, the psycho-behavioural thesis is seldom discussed, but is part of the tacit background of environmental ethics. When it does get explicit mention this is often in the introductions or prefaces of books, or in reference works – for example, when it is said that deep ecology's “greatest influence … may be through the diverse forms of environmental activism that it inspires” (Taylor and Zimmerman 2005, compare Rolston 1988, xii, Sessions 1995, xx-xxi, and Sylvan and Bennett 1994, 4-5). If the psycho-behavioural thesis is true, then it is important in two ways: (1) it provides a rationale for both the diagnosis and solution of environmental problems, and (2) it gives practical justification to the discipline of environmental ethics itself (conceived as the mission to secure converts to the evaluative thesis of non-anthropocentrism). Conversely, if the psycho-behavioural thesis turns out to be false, then—since the thesis is the common tacit assumption of all four theories—not only the discipline itself, but also the four major diagnostic theories of the origin of the environmental predicament will be seriously undermined .

Central to the psycho-behavioural thesis is a problematic assumption: that if people believe they have a moral duty to respect nature or believe that natural things are intrinsically valuable, then they really will act in more environmental-friendly ways. This empirical question cannot be answered by purely a priori philosophical reasoning. In fact, the other core premises in the four major philosophical theories on the origin of environmental crisis are also empirical claims about social and cultural reality. To be credible, they must be able to stand up to empirical testing. For example, are people who think in dualistic and hierarchical ways (as described by feminists) in fact more likely to have anthropocentric attitudes and more likely to act harmfully towards the environment? Are people who believe in animism (as panpsychists argue) in fact less likely to have anthropocentric attitudes and also less likely to harm the environment? What about people who adopt some relational or holistic view of the world, as advocated by deep ecologists? How do they act toward nature compared to those who adopt a more individualistic and atomistic worldview? These questions about the relations among various belief systems and behaviours look no different in kind from the sorts of questions that social scientists regularly ask.

Of the major philosophical theories on the origin of environmental crisis, Lynn White's is the only one to have been empirically tested by social scientists. The net result of these studies so far has been “inconclusive”, especially when education, sex, age and social class are also factored in (Shaiko 1987, Greeley 1993, Woodrum and Hoban 1994, Eckberg and Blocker 1996, Boyd 1999). Moreover, like their philosophical counterparts, environmental sociologists often take the psycho-behavioural thesis of non-anthropocentrism for granted. Some of the best-known and most widely used survey instruments in the field are also problematic. Riley Dunlap and collaborators developed many years ago the “New Environmental Paradigm” (NEP) scale, to measure pro-environmental attitudes (Dunlap and van Liere 1978). That scale, and its later revisions (see Dunlap et al. 2000), is problematic precisely because it explicitly uses indicators of beliefs in anthropocentrism to measure the presence of un-environmental attitudes, thus assuming in advance that anthropocentric beliefs are harmful to the environment. But whether that is so should be settled by empirical investigation rather than by an act of a priori stipulation in survey design.

Despite the fact that there is a striking common underlying structure between White's theory and the other major theories discussed above, no sociological studies so far have been done on the other theories, nor on the common underlying psycho-behavioural thesis of non-anthropocentrism and its effects. This presents an opportunity for interdisciplinary collaborations among philosophers and social scientists. Many tools and methods well established in the social sciences can justifiably be adapted for use in research on environmental philosophy, giving the subject an empirical or even experimental turn. Such work may stimulate new ideas about the origins of our environmental pathologies, and for testing the extent to which belief systems and worldviews actually drive attitudes and behaviours. As long as empirical facts are relevant to philosophical and ethical thought, adoption of social science methods will be a means of keeping our theorising in touch with the motivations and behaviours of the people we are trying to describe and influence.

Similar points about the role of empirical investigations can also be made about theorizing over a range of other problems, including drought, the preservation of biodiversity, and climate change. While it has become commonplace to refer to the present era as “the age of terror”, there is increasing agreement across the entire globe that the world is facing chronic and unprecedented environmental problems, many of them of human origin. Indeed, the United States military, responding to an albeit speculative report on abrupt climate change prepared for the Pentagon by the Global Business Network (see Schwartz and Randall 2003, in the Other Internet Resources section below), have declared that the problems of adjustment to climate change constitute a far more severe threat to national and international security than does terrorism itself. Drought, changing weather patterns, the expected burden of caring for environmental refugees, the effects of consumerism, and the health decline associated with various forms of pollution are continuing and major problems for human beings themselves (see Shue 2001, Sagoff 2001, Thompson 2001), and raise crucial issues about environmental justice (see Shrader-Frechette 2002). At the same time, the continuing destruction of natural environments and the widespread loss of both plant and animal species poses increasing problems for other forms of life on the planet. In facing these problems, there will likely be great opportunities for co-operation and synergy between philosophers and both natural and social scientists.

Like many other important and interesting questions, no single discipline could claim sole ownership of those just raised about the origins of modern environmental crisis and the quandaries we now face, the relation between environmental problems and social injustice, and the vexed question of how human beings should relate to the natural environment in their pursuit of happiness and well-being. The move away from armchair speculation to link up with a wider community of inquiry may be inevitable not only in environmental ethics but in all areas of practical philosophy.

• Abram, D., 1996. The Spell of the Sensuous , New York: Vintage Books, 1996.
• Agar, N., 2001. Life's Intrinsic Value , New York: Columbia University Press.
• Aquinas, T. Summa Contra Gentiles , trans. V. J. Bourke, London: University of Notre Dame Press, 1975.
• Aristotle. Politics , trans. E. Barker, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1948.
• Aiken, W., 1984. “Ethical Issues in Agriculture”, in T. Regan (ed) Earthbound: New Introductory Essays in Environmental Ethics , New York: Random House, pp. 274-88.
• Anker, P. and Witoszek, N., 1998. “The Dream of the Biocentric Community and the Structure of Utopias”, Worldviews 2: 239-56.
• Attfield, R., 1987. A Theory of Value and Obligation , London: Croom Helm.
• –––, 1998. “Saving Nature, Feeding People, and Ethics”, Environmental Values 7: 291-304.
• Attfield, R., 2001. “Christianity”, Chapter 7 in D. Jamieson (ed.), A Companion to Environmental Philosophy , Oxford: Blackwell.
• Barry, J., 1999. Rethinking Green Politics , London: Sage.
• Bentham, J., 1789. Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation , Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1948.
• Benton, Ted, 1993. Natural Relations: Ecology, Animal Rights & Social Justice , London: Verso.
• Bernstein, Jay, 2001. Adorno: Disenchantment and Ethics , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
• Birch, T., 1990 “The Incarceration of Wilderness: Wilderness Areas as Prisons”, Environmental Ethics 12:3-26.
• Bookchin, M., 1980. Toward an Ecological Society , Montreal: Black Rose Books.
• –––, 1982 The Ecology of Freedom: The Emergence and Dissolution of Hierarchy , Palo Alto, CA: Cheshire Books.
• –––, 1987. “Social Ecology Versus Deep Ecology”, Green Perspectives: Newsletter of the Green Program Project , numbers 4, 5 reprinted in Witoszek and Brennan 1999, pp. 281-301.
• –––, 1990. The Philosophy of Social Ecology , Montreal: Black Rose Books.
• Brennan, A., 1984. ‘The Moral Standing of Natural Objects’, Environmental Ethics 6: 35-56
• –––, 1988. Thinking About Nature , London Routledge.
• –––, 1995. “Ethics, Ecology and Economics”, Biodiversity and Conservation 4: 798-811.
• –––, 1998a. “Poverty, Puritanism and Environmental Conflict”, Environmental Values 7: 305-31.
• –––, 1998b. “Bioregionalism—a Misplaced Project?”, Worldviews 2: 215-37.
• –––, 1999 “Comment: Pluralism and Deep Ecology”, in Witoszek and Brennan 1999
• Boyd, Heather, 1999. “Christianity and the environment in the American public”, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion , 38: 36-44.
• Callicott, J.B., 1980. “Animal Liberation, A Triangular Affair”, reprinted in Callicott 1989, pp. 15-38.
• –––, 1985. “Intrinsic Value, Quantum Theory, and Environmental Ethics”, reprinted in Callicott 1989, pp. 157-74.
• –––, 1988. “Animal liberation and Environmental Ethics: Back Together Again”, reprinted in Callicott 1989, pp. 49-59.
• –––, 1989. In Defense of the Land Ethic: Essays in Environmental Philosophy , Albany: SUNY Press.
• –––, 1999. Beyond the Land Ethic: More Essays in Environmental Philosophy , Albany: SUNY Press.
• Callicott, J. Baird, and Ames, Roger T., 1989. Nature in Asian Traditions of Thought , Albany: State University of New York Press.
• Carson, R., 1963. Silent Spring , London: Hamish Hamilton.
• Cheney, J., 1989. “Postmodern Environmental Ethics: Ethics as Bioregional Narrative”, Environmental Ethics 11: 117-34.
• Clark, John, 1997. “A Social Ecology”, in Capitalism Nature Socialism , 8:3, 3–33 and in M. Zimmerman et al ., Environmental Philosophy , 2nd edition, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Clark, John and Martin, Camille, 1996. Liberty, Equality, Geography: The Social Thought of Elisée Reclus , Littleton, CO: Aigis Publications.
• Clark, S. R. L., 1977. The Moral Status of Animals , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Cohen, M. P., 1984. The Pathless Way: John Muir and American Wilderness , Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
• Collins, S., 1974. A Different Heaven and Earth , Valley Forge: Judson Press.
• Crisp, R., 1998. “Animal Liberation is not an Environmental Ethic: A Response to Dale Jamieson”, Environmental Values 7: 476-8.
• Dasgupta, Partha, 2001. Human Well-Being and the Natural Environment , New York: Oxford University Press
• d'Eaubonne, F., 1974. Le Feminisme ou la Mort , Paris: P. Horay
• Devall, B., and G. Sessions, 1985. Deep Ecology: Living as if Nature Mattered , Salt Lake City: Peregrine Smith.
• de Shalit, A., 1994. Why Does Posterity Matter? London: Routledge.
• –––, 1996. “Ruralism or Environmentalism?” Environmental Values 5: 47-58.
• Diesendorf, M. and Hamilton, C., 1997. Human Ecology, Human Economy , St Leonards, NSW: Allen and Unwin.
• Dobson, A., 1990. Green Political Thought , London: Harper Collins.
• Dobson, A. (ed.), 1999. Fairness and Futurity: Essays on Environmental Sustainability and Social Justice , Oxford: Oxford University Press
• Dominick, R., 1998. “Capitalism, Communism and Environmental Protection: Lessons from the German Experience”, Environmental History , 3: 311-32.
• Dryzek, John S., 1997. The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Dunlap, Riley E, and Kent D. van Liere, 1978. “The New Environmental Paradigm: a proposed measuring instrument and preliminary results”, Journal of Environmental Education , 9: 10-19.
• Dunlap, Riley E., van Liere, Kent D., Mertig, Angela and Robert Emmet Jones, 2000. “Measuring Endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: a Revised NEP Scale”, Journal of Social Issues , 56: 425-42.
• Eckberg, Douglas Lee, and T. Jean Blocker, 1996. “Christianity, environmentalism, and the theoretical problem of fundamentalism”, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion , 35/4: 343-55.
• Eckersley, R., 1992. Environmentalism and Political Theory , London: UCL Press.
• Elliot, R., 1982. “Faking Nature”, Inquiry 25: 81-93.
• –––, 1997. Faking Nature , London: Routledge.
• Elliot, R. and Gare, A. (eds), 1983. Environmental Philosophy: A Collection of Readings , Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
• Feinberg, J., 1974. “The Rights of Animals and Unborn Generations”, in W. T. Blackstone (ed.), Philosophy and Environmental Crisis , Athens: University of Georgia Press, pp. 43-68.
• Ferré, F., 1996. “Persons in Nature: Toward an Applicable and Unified Environmental Ethics”, Ethics and the Environment 1: 15-25.
• Ferry, L., 1995. The New Ecological Order , translated C. Volk, Chicago: Chicago University Press.
• Fox, W., 1984. “Deep Ecology: A New Philosophy of Our Time?” The Ecologist 14: 194-200.
• –––, 1995. Toward a transpersonal ecology: Developing new foundations for environmentalism . Albany: State University Of New York Press.
• –––, 2007. A Theory of General Ethics: Human Relationships, Nature and the Built Environment , Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
• Gaard, Greta (ed), 1993. Ecofeminism: Women, Animals, Nature , Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
• Greeley, Andrew M., 1993. “Religion and attitudes toward the environment”, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion , 32: 19-28.
• Green, K., 1994. “Freud, Wollstonecraft and Ecofeminism”, Environmental Ethics 16: 117-34.
• Goodin, Robert E., 1992. Green Political Theory ,Oxford: Blackwell.
• Grosz, E., 1989. Sexual Subversions , London: Allen and Unwin.
• Gruen, L. and Jamieson, D. (eds), 1994. Reflecting on Nature , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Guha, R., 1989. “Radical American Environmentalism and Wilderness Preservation: A Third World Critique”, Environmental Ethics 11: 71-83.
• –––, 1996. “Lewis Mumford, the Forgotten American Environmentalist: An Essay in Rehabilitation”, in David Macauley, ed., Minding Nature: The Philosophers of Ecology , New York: Guilford Press.
• –––, 1999. “Radical American Environmentalism Revisited”, in Witoszek and Brennan (eds.) 1999, pp. 473-9
• Harvey, Graham, 2005. Animism: Respecting the Living World , New York: Columbia University Press.
• Hayward, Tim, and O'Neill, John (eds.), 1997 Justice, Property and the Environment: Social and Legal Perspectives , Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Co., 1997.
• Hettinger, N and Throop, B., 1999. ”Refocusing Ecocentrism”, Environmental Ethics , 21: 3-21
• Horkheiner, M. and Adorno, T., 1969. Dialectic of Enlightenment , trans. Cumming, J., New York: Seabury Press 1972.
• Hume, David, 1751. An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals , ed. T. L. Beauchamp, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
• Jamieson, D., 1998. ‘Animal Liberation is an Environmental Ethic’, Environmental Values 7: 41-57.
• Jamieson, D., 2001. A Companion to Environmental Philosophy , Oxford: Balckwell 2001.
• –––, 2002. Morality's Progress: Essays on Humans, Other Animals, and the Rest of Nature , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Kant, Immanuel. “Duties to Animals and Spirits”, in Louis Infield trans., Lectures on Ethics , New York: Harper and Row, 1963.
• Karliner, J., 1997. The Corporate Planet , San Francisco: Sierra Club Books
• Katz, E., 1991. “Restoration and Redesign: The Ethical Significance of Human Intervention in Nature”, Restoration and Management Notes 9: 90-6.
• –––, 1997. Nature as Subject , New York: Rowman and Littlefield.
• Kheel, M., 1985. “The Liberation of Nature: A Circular Affair”, Environmental Ethics 7: 135-49
• King, R., 2000. “Environmental Ethics and the Built Environment”, Environmental Ethics 22: 115-31
• King, Y., 1989a. “The Ecology of Feminism and the Feminism of Ecology”, in J. Plant (ed.), Healing the Wounds , Philadelphia: New Society Publishers: 18-28.
• King, Y., 1989b. “Healing the Wounds: Feminism, Ecology, and Nature/Culture Dualism”, in A. M. Jaggar and S. R. Bordo (eds.) Gender/Body/Knowledge: Feminist Reconstruction of Being and Knowing , New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, pp. 115-41.
• Korten, D., 1999. The Post-CorporateWorld , Hartford: Kumarian Press
• Leopold, A., 1949. A Sand County Almanac , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Light, A., 1996. “Callicott and Naess on Pluralism”, Inquiry 39: 273-294.
• –––, 2001. “The Urban Blindspot in Environmental Ethics”, Environmental Politics 10: 7-35.
• Light, A. and Katz, E., 1996. Environmental Pragmatism , London: Routledge.
• Light, Andrew and Rolston, Holmes (eds.), 2003. Environmental Ethics: An Anthology , Oxford: Blackwell.
• Light, Andrew and de-Shalit, Avner (eds.), 2003. Moral and Political Reasoning in Environmental Practice , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• List, P. C., 1993. Radical Environmentalism , Belmont: Wadsworth.
• Lo, Y. S., 1999. “Natural and Artifactual: Restored Nature as Subject”, Environmental Ethics 21: 247-66.
• –––, 2001. “The Land Ethic and Callicott's Ethical System (1980-2001): An Overview and Critique”, Inquiry 44: 331-58.
• Luke, Timothy W., 1997. Ecocritique: Contesting the Politics of Nature, Economy, and Culture , Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
• Martinez-Alier, Joan, 2002. The Environmentalism of the Poor: A Study of Ecological Conflicts and Valuation . Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
• Mathews, Freya, 2003. For Love of Matter . Albany: State University of New York Press.
• –––, 2005 Reinhabiting Reality: Towards a Recovery of Culture . Sydney: UNSW Press.
• Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., and Behrens, W. W., 1972. The Limits to Growth , New York: New American Library.
• Mies, Maria and Shiva, Vandana, 1993. Ecofeminism , London: Zed Books
• Mill, J. S., 1874. “Nature”, in Three Essays on Religion , London: Longmans, Green, Reader and Dyer.
• Montaigne, M. de, 1991. The Complete Essays , trans. M. A. Screech, Harmondworth: Penguin.
• Morton, Timothy, 2007. Ecology without Nature: Rethinking Environmental Aesthetics ,Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
• Mumford, L., 1934. Technics and Civilization , London: Secker and Warburg.
• –––, 1944. The Condition of Man , New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
• –––, 1961. The City in History , New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich
• Næss, A., 1973. “The Shallow and the Deep, Long-Range Ecology Movement”, Inquiry 16, reprinted in Sessions 1995, pp. 151-5.
• –––, 1989. Ecology, Community, Lifestyle , trans. and ed. D. Rothenberg, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Nash, R., 1989. The Rights of Nature: A History of Environmental Ethics , Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
• ––– (ed), 1990. American Environmentalism: Readings in Conservation History , New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Norton, B., 1991. Toward Unity Among Environmentalists , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Norton, B., Hutchins, M., Stevens, E. and Maple, T. L. (eds), 1995. Ethics on the Ark , Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.
• O'Neill, J., 1992. “The Varieties of Intrinsic Value”, Monist 75: 119-137.
• –––, 1993. Ecology, Policy and Politics , London: Routledge.
• Ouderkirk, W. and Hill, J. (eds.), 2002. Land, Value, Community: Callicott and Environmental , Albany: State University of New York.
• Palmer, C., 2003. “Placing Animals in Urban Environmental Ethics”, Journal of Social Philosophy , 34: 64-78.
• Passmore, J., 1974. Man's Responsibility for Nature , London: Duckworth, 2nd ed., 1980.
• Plumwood, V., 1993. Feminism and the Mastery of Nature , London: Routledge.
• –––, 1999. “Comments: Self-Realization and Man Apart? The Reed-Næss Debate”, in Witoszek and Brennan (eds.) 1999, pp. 206-10.
• –––, 2002. Environmental Culture , London: Routledge
• Porter, G. and Welsh Brown, J., 1991. Global Environmental Politics , Boulder: Westview Press.
• Regan, T., 1983. The Case for Animal Rights , London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
• Regan, T. and Singer, P. (eds.), 1976. Animal Rights and Human Obligations , Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
• Rolston, H., 1975. “Is There an Ecological Ethic?”, Ethics 85: 93-109.
• –––, 1988. Environmental Ethics: Duties to and Values in the Natural World , Indiana: Temple University Press.
• –––, 1989. Philosophy Gone Wild, New York: Prometheus Books.
• –––, 1996. “Feeding People versus Savng Nature?”, in W. Aiken and H. LaFollette (eds.) World Hunger and Morality , Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, pp. 248-67
• Rousseau, J. J., 1782. Reveries of the Solitary Walker , trans. P. France, Penguin Books, 1979.
• Routley, R., 1973. “Is there a need for a new, an environmental ethic?” Proceedings of the 15th World congress of Philosophy , vol. 1 pp. 205-10, Sophia: Sophia Press (see also Sylvan, R.).
• Routley, R. and Routley, V., 1980. “Human Chauvinism and Environmental Ethics” in Mannison, D., McRobbie, M. A., and Routley, R. (eds.) Environmental Philosophy , Canberra: Australian National University, Research School of Social Sciences, pp. 96-189.
• Sagoff, M., 1984. “Animal Liberation and Environmental Ethics: Bad Marriage, Quick Divorce”, Osgoode Hall Law Journal 22:297-307.
• –––, 1988. The Economy of the Earth , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• –––, 2001. “Consumption”, in Jamieson 2001.
• Sandler, Ronald, 2007. Character and Environment: A Virtue-Oriented Approach to Environmental Ethics , New York: Columbia University Press.
• Schmidtz, D. and Willott, E., 2002 Environmental Ethics: What Really Matters, What Really Works , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Sessions, G. (ed), 1995. Deep Ecology for the 21st Century , Boston: Shambhala 1995.
• Shaiko, Ronald G., 1987. “Religion, politics, and environmental concern: A powerful mix of passions”, Social Science Quarterly , 68: 244-262.
• Shrader-Frechette, K., 1984. Science Policy, Ethics and Economic Methodology , Dordrecht: D Reidel
• –––, 1987. “The real risks of risk-cost-benefit analysis”, in P. T. Durbin (ed.), Technology and Responsibility , Dordrecht: D Reidel, pp. 343-57.
• –––, 1996. “Individualism, Holism, and Environmental Ethics”, Ethics and the Environment 1: 55-69.
• –––, 2002. Environmental Justice: Creating Equality, Reclaiming Democracy , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Shue, Henry, 2001. “Climate”, in Jamieson 2001.
• Singer, P., 1975. Animal Liberation , New York: Random House.
• –––, 1993. Practical Ethics , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2nd ed.
• Stone, Alison, 2006. “Adorno and the Disenchantment of Nature”, Philosophy and Social Criticism , 32: 231-253.
• Stone, C. D., 1972. “Should Trees Have Standing?”, Southern California Law Review 45:450-501 ; later published with a descriptive introduction as Should Trees Have Standing? , Los Angeles: Kaufmann, 1974, and reprinted in Schmidtz and Willott 2002.
• Stretton, H., 1976. Capitalism, Socialism and the Environment , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Sylvan, Richard, Bennett, David, 1994. The Greening of Ethics , Cambridge: White Horse Press.
• Taylor, Bron and Michael Zimmerman, 2005. “Deep Ecology”, in Bron Taylor, ed., The Encyclopaedia of Religion and Nature , London: Continuum.
• Taylor, P., 1981. “The Ethics of Respect for Nature”, Environmental Ethics 3: 197-218.
• –––, 1986. Respect for Nature , Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Thayer, Jr., R. L., 2003. LifePlace: Bioregional Thought and Practice , Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Thompson, Paul, 2001. “Land and Water”, in Jamieson 2001.
• Van Wyck, Peter C., 1997. Primitives in the Wilderness: Deep Ecology and the Missing Human Subject , New York: SUNY Press.
• Varner, G., 1998. In Nature's Interests? Interests, Animal Rights, and Environmental Ethics , Oxford: Oxford University Press
• –––, 2000. “Sentientism”, in D. Jamieson (ed.) A Companion to Environmental Philosophy , Oxford: Blackwell, pp.192-203.
• Vogel, S., 1996. Against Nature: The Concept of Nature in Critical Theory , Albany: State University of New York Press.
• Warren, K. J., 1987. “Feminism and Ecology: Making Connections”, Environmental Ethics 9: 3-21.
• –––, 1990. “The Power and Promise of Ecological Feminism”, Environmental Ethics 12: 125-46.
• –––, 1999. “Ecofeminist Philosophy and Deep Ecology”, in Witoszek and Brennan (eds.) 1999, pp. 255-69.
• Warren, K. J. (ed), 1994. Ecological Feminism , London: Routledge.
• White, L., 1967. “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis”, Science , 55:1203-1207 ; reprinted in Schmidtz and Willott 2002.
• Whitney, Elspeth, 1993. “Lynn White, Ecotheology, and History.” Environmental Ethics 15: 151-169.
• Williams, B., 1992. “Must a Concern for the Environment be Centred on Human Beings?”, reprinted in his Making Sense of Humanity and Other Philosophical Papers , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995: 233-40.
• Witoszek, N., 1997. “Arne Næss and the Norwegian Nature Tradition”, Worldviews 1: 57-73.
• Witoszek, N. and Brennan, A. (eds), 1999. Philosophical Dialogues: Arne Næss and the Progress of Eco-Philosophy , New York: Rowan and Littlefield.
• Woodrum, Eric and Thomas Hoban, 1994. “Theology and religiosity effects on environmentalism”, Review of Religious Research , 35: 193-206.
• Zimmerman, M., 1994. Contesting Earth's Future: Radical Ecology and Postmodernity , Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
• The International Society for Environmental Ethics (ISEE)
• International Association for Environmental Philosophy (IAEP)
• Center for Environmental Philosophy
• Centre for Applied Ethics
• Schwartz, P. and Randall, D., 2003. “An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and its Implications for United States National Security”, available for download at GBN: Abrupt Climate Change .

aesthetics: environmental | animals, moral status of | communitarianism | consequentialism | critical theory | ecology | ecology: biodiversity | ethics: virtue | feminist (interventions): ethics | globalization | justice: intergenerational | metaethics | panpsychism | respect | value: intrinsic vs. extrinsic

Acknowledgments

The authors are deeply grateful to the following people who gave generously of their time and advice to help shape the final structure of this entry: Clare Palmer, Mauro Grün, Lori Gruen, Gary Varner, William Throop, Patrick O'Donnell, Thomas Heyd, and Edward N. Zalta. Also, thanks to Dale Jamieson for comments on the version revised and updated in January 2008.

• Environment
• Information Science
• Social Issues
• Argumentative
• Cause and Effect
• Classification
• Compare and Contrast
• Descriptive
• Exemplification
• Informative
• Controversial
• Exploratory
• What Is an Essay
• Length of an Essay
• Generate Ideas
• Types of Essays
• Structuring an Essay
• Outline For Essay
• Essay Introduction
• Thesis Statement
• Body of an Essay
• Writing a Conclusion
• Essay Writing Tips
• Drafting an Essay
• Revision Process
• Fix a Broken Essay
• Format of an Essay
• Essay Examples
• Essay Checklist
• Essay Writing Service
• Pay for Research Paper
• Write My Research Paper
• Write My Essay
• Custom Essay Writing Service
• Admission Essay Writing Service
• Pay for Essay
• Academic Ghostwriting
• Write My Book Report
• Case Study Writing Service
• Dissertation Writing Service
• Coursework Writing Service
• Lab Report Writing Service
• Do My Assignment
• Buy College Papers
• Capstone Project Writing Service
• Buy Research Paper
• Custom Essays for Sale

Can’t find a perfect paper?

• Free Essay Samples
• Environmental Ethics

Essays on Environmental Ethics

A discussion of water ethics keeps tying social customs and hydrological limitations to actual water needs. The quandary around water has sparked a discussion over whether it should be made available to people as a public good or utilised for commercial purposes. Lambooy (2011) claims that the normative foundation for...

Words: 1486

Waste management challenges are critical in today's global culture due to climate change fears. As opposed to incineration and landfill, recycling is the most effective waste disposal mechanism. The decline in landfill capacity due to ever-increasing population and usage patterns has forced governments and other organizations to pursue alternate waste...

Words: 4365

Climate change is a worldwide concern that has piqued the interest of many academics. Many losses have been suffered in the climate, economy, and culture at large as a result of dramatic shifts in climatic conditions and global temperature. Not only has there been a loss of biodiversity, especially of...

Words: 3913

Found a perfect essay sample but want a unique one?

Request writing help from expert writer in you feed!

Plastics have been an integral part of human life. It is one of the most prevalent materials in the world. Plastics are commonly used by industries for packaging purposes (Fanshawe Parsons 5). The Impact on Oceans Studies show that the marine environment carried the biggest mass of the plastic debris...

Words: 1962

Nowadays, a large number of moral dilemmas that are related to business and the environment are being discussed. In some instances, society is split among two choices. Even though a code of ethics dictates the corporate world, some factors do not have concrete answers, and organizations face challenges in making...

Words: 1589

Related topic to Environmental Ethics

• A-Z Publications

Annual Review of Environment and Resources

Volume 39, 2014, review article, environmental ethics.

• Clare Palmer 1 , Katie McShane 2 , and Ronald Sandler 3
• View Affiliations Hide Affiliations Affiliations: 1 Department of Philosophy, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77845; email: [email protected] 2 Department of Philosophy, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523-1781; email: [email protected] 3 Department of Philosophy and Religion, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts 02115; email: [email protected]
• Vol. 39:419-442 (Volume publication date October 2014) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-121112-094434
• First published as a Review in Advance on August 13, 2014
• © Annual Reviews

Environmental ethics—the study of ethical questions raised by human relations with the nonhuman environment—emerged as an important subfield of philosophy during the 1970s. It is now a flourishing area of research. This article provides a review of the secular, Western traditions in the field. It examines both anthropocentric and nonanthropocentric claims about what has value, as well as divergent views about whether environmental ethics should be concerned with bringing about best consequences, respecting principles and rights, or embodying environmental virtues. The article also briefly considers two critical traditions—ecofeminism and environmental pragmatism—and explores some of the difficult environmental ethics questions posed by anthropogenic climate change.

Article metrics loading...

Full text loading...

Literature Cited

• Preston CJ . 1.  2005 . Epistemology and environmental philosophy. Special issue. Ethics Environ. 10 : 2 1– 216 [Google Scholar]
• Odenbaugh J . 2.  2007 . Seeing the forest and the trees. Philos. Sci. 74 : 628– 41 [Google Scholar]
• Carlson A . 3.  2008 . Nature and Landscape: An Introduction to Environmental Aesthetics New York: Columbia Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Jenkins W , Chapple C . 4.  2011 . Religion and environment. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 36 : 441– 63 [Google Scholar]
• Kelbessa W . 5.  2005 . The rehabilitation of indigenous environmental ethics in Africa. Diogenes 52 : 3 17– 34 [Google Scholar]
• James SP , Cooper D . 6.  2008 . Buddhism and the environment. Special edition. Contemp. Buddhism 8 : 2 93– 108 [Google Scholar]
• Brown C , Toadvine T . 7.  2003 . Eco-Phenomenology: Back to the Earth Itself Albany: State Univ. N.Y. Press [Google Scholar]
• Foltz B , Frodeman B . 8.  2004 . Rethinking Nature: Essays in Environmental Philosophy Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Westra L , Robinson T . 9.  1997 . The Greeks and the Environment Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield [Google Scholar]
• Leopold A . 10.  1968 [1949] . A Sand County Almanac: And Sketches Here and There Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press, 2nd ed.. [Google Scholar]
• Taylor P . 11.  1986 . Respect for Nature Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Rolston H . 12.  1986 . Philosophy Gone Wild New York: Prometheus [Google Scholar]
• Elliot R , Gare A . 13.  1983 . Environmental Philosophy: A Collection of Readings Milton Keynes, UK: Open Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Des Jardins JR . 14.  1993 . Environmental Ethics: An Introduction to Environmental Philosophy Belmont, CA: Wadsworth [Google Scholar]
• VanDeVeer D , Pierce C . 15.  1993 . The Environmental Ethics and Policy Book Belmont, CA: Wadsworth [Google Scholar]
• Minteer BA . 16.  2012 . Refounding Environmental Ethics: Pragmatism, Principle, and Practice Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• O'Neill J . 17.  1992 . The varieties of intrinsic value. Monist 75 : 2 119– 37 [Google Scholar]
• Jamieson D . 18.  2008 . Ethics and the Environment: An Introduction Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• McShane K . 19.  2007 . Why environmental ethics shouldn't give up on intrinsic value. Environ. Ethics 29 : 1 43– 61 [Google Scholar]
• Attfield R . 20.  1995 . Value, Obligation, and Meta-Ethics Amsterdam: Rodopi [Google Scholar]
• Norton BG . 21.  1987 . Why Preserve Natural Variety? Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Rolston H . 22.  1988 . Environmental Ethics Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Weston A . 23.  1985 . Beyond intrinsic value: pragmatism in environmental ethics. Environ. Ethics 7 : 4 321– 39 [Google Scholar]
• Maguire LA , Justus J . 24.  2008 . Why intrinsic value is a poor basis for conservation decisions. BioScience 58 : 10 910– 11 [Google Scholar]
• Fox W . 25.  1993 . What does the recognition of intrinsic value entail?. Trumpeter 10 : 3 http://trumpeter.athabascau.ca/index.php/trumpet/article/view/379/601 [Google Scholar]
• Callicott JB . 26.  1992 . Can a theory of moral sentiments support a genuinely normative environmental ethic?. Inquiry 35 : 183– 98 [Google Scholar]
• Warren MA . 27.  2000 . Moral Status: Obligations to Persons and Other Living Things Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Goodpaster KE . 28.  1978 . On being morally considerable. J. Philos. 75 : 6 308– 25 [Google Scholar]
• White L Jr . 29.  1967 . The historic roots of our ecologic crisis. Science 155 : 3767 1203– 7 [Google Scholar]
• Naess A . 30.  1973 . The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement. A summary. Inquiry 16 : 1 95– 100 [Google Scholar]
• Devall B , Sessions G . 31.  1985 . Deep Ecology: Living as if Nature Mattered Salt Lake City, UT: Gibbs Smith [Google Scholar]
• Norton BG . 32.  1991 . Towards Unity Among Environmentalists New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Singer P . 33.  1975 . Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals New York: Avon [Google Scholar]
• Regan T . 34.  1983 . The Case for Animal Rights Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press [Google Scholar]
• Cahen H . 35.  1988 . Against the moral considerability of ecosystems. Environ. Ethics 10 : 3 195– 216 [Google Scholar]
• Thompson J . 36.  1990 . A refutation of environmental ethics. Environ. Ethics 12 : 147– 60 [Google Scholar]
• Johnson L . 37.  1991 . A Morally Deep World Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Nelson M . 38.  1993 . A defense of environmental ethics: a reply to Janna Thompson. Environ. Ethics 45 : 245– 57 [Google Scholar]
• Sandler R . 39.  2013 . The Ethics of Species London: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Callicott JB . 40.  1980 . Animal liberation: a triangular affair. Environ. Ethics 2 : 311– 28 [Google Scholar]
• Varner G . 41.  1998 . In Nature's Interests? Interests, Animal Rights and Environmental Ethics Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• 42.  US Environ. Prot. Agency (EPA) 2013 . Plan EJ 2014 Progress Report Washington, DC: EPA http://www.epa.gov/compliance/ej/resources/policy/plan-ej-2014/plan-ej-progress-report-2014.pdf [Google Scholar]
• Camacho D . 43.  1998 . Environmental Injustices, Political Struggles: Race, Class, and the Environment Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Bullard RD , Mohai P , Saha R , Wright B . 44.  2007 . Toxic Wastes and Race at Twenty: 1989–2007 Cleveland, OH: United Church Christ [Google Scholar]
• Westra L , Lawson B . 45.  2001 . Faces of Environmental Racism: Confronting Issues of Global Justice Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2nd ed.. [Google Scholar]
• Sandler R , Pezzullo PC . 46.  2007 . Environmental Justice and Environmentalism Cambridge, MA: MIT Press [Google Scholar]
• Schlosberg D . 47.  2007 . Environmental Justice: Theories, Movements and Nature New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Shrader-Frechette K . 48.  2002 . Environmental Justice: Creating Equality, Reclaiming Democracy Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Bryant B . 49.  1995 . Environmental Justice: Issues, Policies, and Solutions Washington, DC: Island [Google Scholar]
• Guha R . 50.  1989 . Radical American environmentalism and wilderness preservation: a third world critique. Environ. Ethics 11 : 71– 83 [Google Scholar]
• Shiva V . 51.  1999 . Biopiracy: The Plunder of Nature and Knowledge Cambridge, MA: South End [Google Scholar]
• Hassoun N . 52.  2012 . The problem of debt-for-nature swaps from a human rights perspective. J. Appl. Philos. 29 : 4 359– 77 [Google Scholar]
• Gardiner S . 53.  2009 . The Perfect Moral Storm: The Ethical Tragedy of Climate Change New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Singer P . 54.  2004 . One World: The Ethics of Globalization New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• 55.  World Comm. Environ. Dev 1987 . Our Common Future. New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Thompson PB . 56.  2012 . Sustainability: ethical foundations. Nat. Educ. Knowledge 3 : 10 11 http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/sustainability-ethical-foundations-71373239 [Google Scholar]
• Norton BG . 57.  2005 . Sustainability: A Philosophy of Adaptive Ecosystem Management Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
• Thompson PB . 58.  2010 . The Agrarian Vision: Sustainability and Environmental Ethics Lexington: Univ. Ky. Press [Google Scholar]
• Posner E , Sunstein C . 59.  2008 . Climate change justice. Georget. Law J. 96 : 1565– 612 [Google Scholar]
• Caney S . 60.  2012 . Just emissions. Philos. Public Aff. 40 : 4 255– 300 [Google Scholar]
• Broome J . 61.  2012 . Climate Matters New York: Norton [Google Scholar]
• Parfit D . 62.  1984 . Reasons and Persons Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Mulgan T . 63.  2006 . Future People New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Roberts M , Wasserman D . 64.  2009 . Harming Future Persons New York: Springer [Google Scholar]
• 65.  U.N. Food Agric. Organ. (UNFAO) 2012 . State of the World Fisheries and Aquaculture Rome: Food Agric. Organ. U.N. [Google Scholar]
• Haberl H , Erb KH , Krausmann F , Gaube V , Bondeau A . 66.  et al. 2007 . Quantifying and mapping the human appropriation of net primary production in Earth's terrestrial ecosystems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104 : 31 12942– 47 [Google Scholar]
• Singer P . 67.  1979 . Killing humans and killing animals. Inquiry 22 : 145– 56 [Google Scholar]
• Palmer C . 68.  2010 . Animal Ethics in Context New York: Columbia Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Donaldson S , Kymlicka W . 69.  2011 . Zoopolis: A Political Theory of Animal Rights New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Carruthers P . 70.  1992 . The Animals Issue London: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Cohen C . 71.  1986 . The case for the use of animals in biomedical research. N. Engl. J. Med. 315 : 14 865– 70 [Google Scholar]
• Nobis N . 72.  2004 . Carl Cohen's ‘kind’ argument for animal rights and against animal rights. J. Appl. Philos. 21 : 1 43– 59 [Google Scholar]
• Schweitzer A . 73.  1987 [1923] . The Philosophy of Civilization New York: Prometheus [Google Scholar]
• Attfield R . 74.  1987 . A Theory of Value and Obligation Beckenham, UK: Croom Helm [Google Scholar]
• Agar N . 75.  2001 . Life's Intrinsic Value New York: Columbia Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Schmidtz D . 76.  1998 . Are all species equal?. J. Appl. Philos. 15 : 57– 67 [Google Scholar]
• Sterba JP . 77.  1998 . A biocentrist strikes back. Environ. Ethics 20 : 361– 76 [Google Scholar]
• Callicott JB . 78.  1989 . In Defense of the Land Ethic: Essays in Environmental Philosophy Albany: State Univ. N.Y. Press [Google Scholar]
• Norton BG . 79.  1988 . The constancy of Leopold's land ethic. Conserv. Biol. 2 : 1 93– 102 [Google Scholar]
• Callicott JB . 80.  1987 . Companion to ‘A Sand County Almanac’: Interpretive and Critical Essays Madison: Univ. Wis. Press [Google Scholar]
• Sagoff M . 81.  2013 . What does environmental protection protect?. Ethics Policy Environ. 16 : 3 239– 57 [Google Scholar]
• Costanza R , Norton BG , Haskell BD . 82.  1992 . Ecosystem Health: New Goals for Environmental Management Washington, DC: Island [Google Scholar]
• Westra L . 83.  1994 . An Environmental Proposal for Ethics: The Principle of Integrity Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield [Google Scholar]
• Jamieson D . 84.  1995 . Ecosystem health: some preventive medicine. Environ. Values 4 : 333– 44 [Google Scholar]
• McShane K . 85.  2004 . Ecosystem health. Environ. Ethics 26 : 3 227– 45 [Google Scholar]
• Soulé M . 86.  1985 . What is conservation biology?. BioScience 35 : 11 727– 34 [Google Scholar]
• Katz E . 87.  1992 . The big lie: human restoration of nature. Res. Philos. Technol. 12 : 231– 41 [Google Scholar]
• Bradley B . 88.  2001 . The value of endangered species. J. Value Inq. 35 : 43– 58 [Google Scholar]
• Maier DS . 89.  2012 . What's So Good About Biodiversity? A Call for Better Reasoning About Nature's Value Dordrecht, Neth.: Springer [Google Scholar]
• Preston CJ . 90.  2011 . Re-thinking the unthinkable: environmental ethics and the presumptive argument against geoengineering. Environ. Values 20 : 457– 79 [Google Scholar]
• Elliot R . 91.  1982 . Faking nature. Inquiry 25 : 81– 93 [Google Scholar]
• Hettinger N , Throop W . 92.  1999 . Refocusing ecocentrism. Environ. Ethics 21 : 1 3– 21 [Google Scholar]
• Callicott JB , Nelson MP . 93.  1999 . The Great New Wilderness Debate Athens: Univ. Georgia Press [Google Scholar]
• Kareiva P , Marvier M . 94.  2012 . What is conservation science?. BioScience 62 : 11 962– 69 [Google Scholar]
• McKibben B . 95.  1989 . The End of Nature New York: Random House [Google Scholar]
• Carter A . 96.  2005 . Inegalitarian biocentric consequentialism, the minimax implication and multidimensional value theory: a brief proposal for a new direction in environmental ethics. Utilitas 17 : 1 62– 84 [Google Scholar]
• Singer P . 97.  1989 . All animals are equal. Animal Rights and Human Obligations T Regan, P Singer 148– 62 Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall [Google Scholar]
• Holbrook D . 98.  1997 . The consequentialist side of environmental ethics. Environ. Values 6 : 1 87– 96 [Google Scholar]
• McMahan J . 99.  2010 . The meat eaters. New York Times Sept. 19. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/19/the-meat-eaters/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0 [Google Scholar]
• Sagoff M . 100.  1984 . Animal liberation and environmental ethics: bad marriage, quick divorce. Osgoode Hall Law J. 22 : 297– 307 [Google Scholar]
• Hayward T . 101.  2005 . Constitutional Environmental Rights Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Francione G . 102.  2000 . Introduction to Animal Rights: Your Child or the Dog? Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Cochrane A . 103.  2012 . Animal Rights Without Liberation New York: Columbia Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Hill TE Jr . 104.  1983 . Ideals of human excellence and preserving natural environments. Environ. Ethics 5 : 3 211– 24 [Google Scholar]
• Sandler R . 105.  2007 . Character and Environment: A Virtue-Oriented Approach to Environmental Ethics New York: Columbia Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Sandler R , Cafaro P . 106.  2005 . Environmental Virtue Ethics Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield [Google Scholar]
• van Wensveen L . 107.  2000 . Dirty Virtues: The Emergence of Ecological Virtue Ethics Amherst, NY: Prometheus [Google Scholar]
• Warren K . 108.  1993 . Introduction. Environmental Philosophy: From Animal Rights to Radical Ecology ME Zimmerman, JB Callicott, J Clark, KJ Warren, IJ Klaver, J Clark 253– 67 Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall [Google Scholar]
• Ruether RR . 109.  1975 . New Woman, New Earth: Sexist Ideologies and Human Liberation New York: Seabury [Google Scholar]
• Plumwood V . 110.  1991 . Nature, self and gender: feminism, environmental philosophy and the critique of rationalism. Hypatia 6 : 1 3– 27 [Google Scholar]
• Kheel M . 111.  1993 . From heroic to holistic ethics: the ecofeminist challenge. Ecofeminism: Women, Animals, Nature G Gaard 243– 71 Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Plumwood V . 112.  1993 . Feminism and the Mastery of Nature London: Routledge [Google Scholar]
• Light A , Katz E . 113.  1996 . Environmental Pragmatism New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
• Norton BG . 114.  1997 . Convergence and contextualism: some clarifications and a reply to Steverson. Environ. Ethics 19 : 1 87– 99 [Google Scholar]
• Light A . 115.  2002 . Contemporary environmental ethics: from metaethics to public philosophy. Metaphilosophy 33 : 4 426– 49 [Google Scholar]
• Ferkany M , Whyte K . 116.  2012 . The importance of participatory virtues in the future of environmental education. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 25 : 3 419– 34 [Google Scholar]
• O'Neill J . 117.  1993 . Ecology, Policy and Politics London: Routledge [Google Scholar]
• Attfield R . 118.  2011 . Climate change, environmental ethics, and biocentrism. Climate Change and Environmental Ethics VP Nanda 31– 41 New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction [Google Scholar]
• Sarkar S . 119.  2005 . Biodiversity and Environmental Philosophy Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Basl J , Sandler R . 120.  2013 . Designer Biology: The Ethics of Intensively Engineering Biological and Ecological Systems Lanham, MD: Lexington [Google Scholar]
• Streiffer R , Basl J . 121.  2013 . The ethics of agricultural animal biotechnology. Ethics and Emerging Technologies R Sandler 501– 5 New York: Palgrave Macmillan [Google Scholar]
• Preston CJ . 122.  2008 . Synthetic biology: drawing a line in Darwin's sand. Environ. Values 17 : 1 23– 39 [Google Scholar]
• Comstock G . 123.  2001 . Vexing Nature? On the Ethical Case Against Agricultural Biotechnology Dordrecht, Neth.: Springer [Google Scholar]
• Thompson PB . 124.  2013 . Artificial meat. Ethics and Emerging Technologies R Sandler 516– 30 New York: Palgrave Macmillan [Google Scholar]
• Light A . 125.  2000 . Ecological restoration and the culture of nature: a pragmatic perspective. Restoring Nature: Perspectives from the Humanities and Social Sciences P Gobster, B Hull 49– 70 Washington, DC: Island [Google Scholar]
• Throop W . 126.  2012 . Environmental virtues and the aims of restoration. See Ref. 149 47– 62
• Higgs E . 127.  2012 . History, novelty and virtue in ecological restoration. See Ref. 149 81– 102
• Sandler R . 128.  2012 . Global warming and virtues of ecological restoration. See Ref. 149 63– 80
• Light A . 129.  2012 . The death of restoration. See Ref. 149 105– 24
• Nolt J . 130.  2011 . Nonanthropocentric climate ethics. WIREs Clim. Change 2 : 701– 11 [Google Scholar]
• McCoy ED , Berry K . 131.  2008 . Using an ecological ethics framework to make decisions about the relocation of wildlife. Sci. Eng. Ethics 14 : 505– 21 [Google Scholar]
• Camacho A . 132.  2010 . Assisted migration: redefining nature and natural resource law under climate change. Yale J. Regul. 27 : 171– 255 [Google Scholar]
• Aubin I , Garbe CM , Colombo S , Drever CR , McKenney DW . 133.  et al. 2011 . Why we disagree about assisted migration: ethical implications of a key debate regarding the future of Canada's forest. For. Chron. 87 : 755– 65 [Google Scholar]
• Albrecht G , Brooke C , Bennett D , Garnett S . 134.  2013 . The ethics of assisted colonization in the age of anthropogenic climate change. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 26 : 827– 45 [Google Scholar]
• Ricciardi A , Simberloff D . 135.  2008 . Why assisted migration is not a viable conservation strategy. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24 : 248– 53 [Google Scholar]
• Sandler R . 136.  2010 . The value of species and the ethical foundations of assisted colonization. Conserv. Biol. 24 : 2 424– 31 [Google Scholar]
• Buma B . 137.  2013 . Don't give up just yet: maintaining species, services and systems in a changing world. Ethics, Policy Environ. 16 : 33– 36 [Google Scholar]
• Larson B , Palmer C . 138.  2013 . Assisted migration is no panacea, but let's not discount it either. Ethics, Policy Environ. 16 : 16– 18 [Google Scholar]
• Jamieson D . 139.  1996 . Ethics and intentional climate change. Clim. Change 33 : 323– 36 [Google Scholar]
• Hamilton C . 140.  2013 . The ethical foundations of climate engineering. Climate Change Geoengineering: Philosophical Perspectives, Legal Issues and Governance Frameworks W Burns, A Strauss 39– 58 London: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Tuana N . 141.  2013 . The ethical dimensions of geoengineering: solar radiation management through sulfur particle injection. Geoengineering our climate? Ethics, policy and governance. Work. Pap. 2, Geoeng. Our Clim. Work. Pap. Opin. Artic. Ser., Penn State Univ. Press http://geoengineeringourclimate.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/tuana-2013-ethics-of-geoengineering-click-for-download.pdf [Google Scholar]
• Hale B . 142.  2012 . The world that would have been: moral hazard arguments against geoengineering. See Ref. 147 113– 32
• Davies G . 143.  2010 . Geoengineering: a critique. Clim. Law 1 : 3 429– 41 [Google Scholar]
• Svoboda T , Keller K , Goes M , Tuana N . 144.  2011 . Sulfate aerosol geoengineering: the question of justice. Public Aff. Q. 25 : 3 157– 80 [Google Scholar]
• Preston CJ . 145.  2012 . Solar radiation management and vulnerable populations: the moral deficit and its prospects. See Ref. 147 77– 94
• Hamilton C . 146.  2013 . No, we should not just ‘at least do the research.’. Nature 496 : 7444 139 [Google Scholar]
• Preston CJ . 147.  2012 . Engineering the Climate: The Ethics of Solar Radiation Management Lanham, MD: Lexington [Google Scholar]
• Gardiner S . 148.  2010 . Is arming the future with geoengineering really the lesser evil? Some doubts about intentionally manipulating the climate system. Climate Ethics: Essential Readings S Gardiner, S Caney, D Jamieson 284– 314 New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Article Type: Review Article

Most Read This Month

Most cited most cited rss feed, adaptive governance of social-ecological systems, dynamics of land-use and land-cover change in tropical regions, climate change and food systems, wetland resources: status, trends, ecosystem services, and restorability, global water pollution and human health, adaptation to environmental change: contributions of a resilience framework, i ndustrial s ymbiosis : literature and taxonomy, environmental governance, c arbon d ioxide e missions from the g lobal c ement i ndustry 1, global biogeochemical cycling of mercury: a review.