Achieving a sustainable
economy
Building a strong, stable and sustainable economy
which provides properity and opportunities for all and in which
environmental and social costs fall on those who impose them and
efficient resource use is incentivised.
Conservation management as an applied
aspect of cultural ecology
To the extent that we have genuine respect for
the natural world and the living things in it, the conflict between
human civilization and the natural world is not an uncontrolled and
uncontrollable struggle for survival. From an ethical standpoint,
the competition between human cultures and the natural ways of
other species can exemplify a moral order that can best be
described as live and let live. To realise this order, we as moral
agents have to impose constraints on our own lifestyles and
cultural practices to create a moral universe in which both respect
for wild creatures and respect for persons are given a place. The
more we take for ourselves, the less there is for other species,
but there is no reason why, together with humans, a great variety
of animal and plant life cannot exist side by side on our planet.
In order to share the Earth with other species, however, we humans
must impose limits on our population, our habits of consumption,
and our technology. In particular, we have to deal with serious
moral dilemmas posed by the competing interests of humans and non
humans. The problems of choice take on an ethical dimension
but do not entail giving up or ignoring our human values. The aim
is to manage situations in which the basic interests of animals and
plants are in conflict with the non basic interests of
humans.
Basic interests
Basic interests of humans are what rational and
factually enlightened people would value as an essential part of
their very existence as persons. They are what people need if they
are going to be able to pursue those goals and purposes that make
life meaningful and worthwhile. Their basic interests are those
interests which, when morally legitimate, they have a right to have
fulfilled. We do not have a right to whatever will make us happy or
contribute to the realization of our value system, but we do have a
right to the necessary conditions for the maintenance and
development of our person-hood. These conditions include
subsistence and security ("the right to life"), autonomy, and
liberty. A violation of people's moral rights is the worst thing
that can happen to them, since it deprives them of what is
essential to their being able to live a meaningful and worthwhile
existence as persons.
Non-basic interests
Our non-basic interests define our individual
value systems. They are the particular ends we consider worth
seeking and the means we consider best for achieving them. The non-
basic interests of humans thus vary from person to person, while
their basic interests are common to all.
The principles of conservation apply to two
different kinds of conflicts in which the basic interests of
animals and plants conflict with the non basic interests of humans.
But each principle applies to a different type of non basic human
interests. In order to differentiate between these types we must
consider various ways in which the non basic interests of humans
are related to the attitude of respect for nature.
First, there are non basic human interests which
are intrinsically incompatible with the attitude of respect for
nature. The pursuit of these interests would be given up by anyone
who had respect for nature, because the kind of actions and
intentions directly embody or express an exploitative attitude
toward nature. Such an attitude is incompatible with that of
respect because it considers wild creatures to have merely
instrumental value for human ends, and denies the inherent worth of
animals and plants in natural ecosystems. Examples of such non-
basic exploitative interests and of actions performed are:-
-
Slaughtering elephants so the ivory of their tusks can be used to
carve items for the tourist trade.
- Killing
rhinoceros so that their horns can be used as dagger handles.
- Picking
rare wildflowers, such as orchids and cactuses, for one's private
collection.
- Capturing
tropical birds, for sale as caged pets.
- Trapping
and killing reptiles, such as snakes, crocodiles, alligators, and
turtles, for their skins and shells to be used in making expensive
shoes, handbags, and other "fashion" products.
- Hunting
and killing rare wild mammals, such as leopards and jaguars, for
the luxury fur trade.
All hunting and fishing which is done as an
enjoyable pastime (whether or not the animals killed are eaten),
when such activities are not necessary to meet the basic interests
of humans. This includes all sport hunting and
recreational. All such practices treat wild creatures
as mere instruments to human ends, thus denying their inherent
worth. They are non basic. Wild animals and plants are being
valued only as a source. Their central purposes
represent an exploitative attitude towards nature. Those who
participate to fulfil the aims of such activities, as well as those
who enjoy or consume the products, knowing the methods by which
they were obtained, cannot be said to have genuine respect for
nature.
It should be noted that none of the actions
violate human rights. Indeed, if we stay within the boundaries of
human ethics alone, people have a moral right to do such things,
since they have a freedom-right to pursue without interference
their legitimate interests and, within those boundaries, an
interest is "legitimate" if its pursuit does not involve doing any
wrong to another human being.
It is only when the principles of environmental
ethics are applied to such actions, that the exercise of freedom-
rights in these cases must be weighed against the
demands of the ethics of respect for nature. We then find that the
practices in question are wrong, all things considered. For if they
were judged permissible, the basic interests of animals and plants
would be assigned a lower value or importance than the non basic
interests of humans. No one who had the attitude of respect for
nature (as well as the attitude of respect for persons) would find
this acceptable. After all, a human being can still live a good
life even if he or she does not own caged wild birds, wear apparel
made from furs and reptile skins, collect rare wildflowers, or
engage in recreational hunting.
Principle of distributive justice
The principle of distributive justice provides
the criteria for managing a just distribution of interest-
fulfillment among all parties to a conflict when the interests are
all basic and hence of equal importance to those involved. Being of
equal importance, they are counted as having the same moral weight.
This equality of weight must be preserved in the conflict-resolving
decision if it is to be fair to all. The principle of distributive
justice requires that when the interests of the parties are all
basic ones and there exists a natural source of good that can be
used for the benefit of any of the parties, each party must be
allotted an equal share.
The amount of arable land needed for raising
grain and other plants as food for those animals that are in turn
to be eaten by humans, is much greater compared with the amount of
land needed for raising grain and other plants for direct human
consumption. Consider, for example, the fact that in order to
produce one pound of protein for human consumption, a steer must be
fed 21 pounds of protein, all from plant sources. For pork the
ratio is 8.3 pounds to one and for poultry, 5.5 pounds. When
spelled out in terms of the acreage of land required, one acre of
cereal grains to be used as human food can produce five times more
protein than one acre used for meat production; one acre of legumes
(peas, lentils, and beans) can produce ten times more; and one acre
of leafy vegetables fifteen times more. So the case for
vegetarianism based on the attitude of respect for nature comes
down to the following: We can drastically reduce the amount of
cultivated land needed for human food production by changing from a
meat-eating culture to a vegetarian culture. The land thus saved
could be set aside as sanctuaries for wildlife, in accordance with
the idea of permanent habitat allocation to be discussed below.
Ultimately, far less destruction of natural ecosystems than is now
taking place would result. Vegetarians, in short, use much less of
the surface of the Earth to sustain themselves than do meat-
eaters. And the less humans use for themselves the more there is
for other species.
It applies to circumstances where it is possible
for humans to make certain adjustments in their relations to wild
animals and plants, even when their basic interests are in
conflict. In these circumstances some approaches to equality of
treatment between humans and non humans can be realized by
transforming situations of rivalry and competition into patterns of
mutual accommodation and tolerance.
These approaches are: (i) permanent habitat
allocation, (ii) common conservation, (iii) environmental
integration, and (iv) rotation.
(i) Permanent habitat allocation. This method
involves setting aside certain land and water areas of the Earth's
surface to be "forever wild." It is the familiar policy of
wilderness preservation. The justification for such a policy lies
in the fact that only by means of it can at least some of the
world's wild communities of life continue their existence in a more
or less natural state, and so receive their share of the benefits
of the Earth's physical environment.
(ii) Common conservation. The method of common
conservation is the sharing of resources while they are being used
by both humans and non humans. If people have built a town in a
desert or other area where there is a very limited supply of water,
the policy of common conservation would mean that humans share the
water supply with other species- populations that need it for their
survival. The plants of the desert as well as the birds, reptiles,
insects, and mammals that live there are all recognized as
legitimate users of the water supply along with people. The basic
idea is that we do not take it all for ourselves but leave some of
it for others, who need it as much as we do.
Conservation is a human practice, but it need not
be carried on for the benefit of humans alone. There is nothing in
the meaning of conservation that excludes its being done to help
other creatures further their well- being. As moral agents we have
the freedom to choose to make available to others a portion of a
natural resource that we also must use for our own good. Conserving
a resource, whether it is renewable or nonrenewable, means using it
carefully and wisely, saving some for the future when it will be
needed as much as at present. None of it is wasted or rendered
unfit for use by pollution. Common conservation refers to a human
practice of sharing the use of a resource with other beings,
conserving it for the mutual benefit of all.
(iii) Environmental integration. This is the
deliberate attempt to fit human construction and "developments"
into natural surroundings in a way that preserves the ecological
integrity of a region as a whole. Office buildings and stores,
factories and warehouses, hotels and motels, houses and apartment
complexes, airports and highways, schools and libraries, bridges
and tunnels, and other large- scale human artifacts are designed
and located with a view to avoiding serious ecological disturbance
and environmental degradation. Natural areas in the region that are
essential for ecological stability are left unmodified. Thus
certain habitats used by wild species- populations are not
destroyed, and some wildlife is given a chance to survive alongside
the works of human culture.
(iv) Rotation. The fourth method of distributing
benefits fairly is the method of rotation or "taking turns." The
rule is that whenever possible we should give the
species-populations of a wild biotic community their chance at
receiving benefits from inhabiting a particular sector of the
Earth's natural environment if we humans have also benefited, for a
period of time. It is only fair that humans and non humans take
turns at having access to favorable environments and habitats. We
might think of this as time allocation, for a given place, to
contrast it with the method of permanent wilderness preservation,
which is a form of space allocation.
The general scheme of a rotation system works as
follows. Suppose there is an area of the natural environment that
can be used for satisfying the basic interests of a certain number
of humans for a limited time without destroying the biological
soundness of the ecology of that area. The environment and its
living inhabitants are treated in such a way that it is possible at
a later time for a wild community of life to satisfy its basic
interests in the area. By occupying the area at different time
periods, both humans and non humans can meet basic needs.
International effort
Conserving natural resources is about using less
and managing stocks to ensure they are renewable and an even flow
is carried forward into the long-term. This philosophy was
endorsed by the international community in towards the end of the
1980s.
For example;
- the
Governing Council of UNEP, the UN Environment programme, in its
decision 15/2 of 1989, "invites the attention of the General
Assembly to the understanding of the Governing Council with regard
to the concept of "sustainable development", as follows: "Statement
by the Governing Council on Sustainable Development"
-
"Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the
present without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs and does not imply in any way encroachment
upon national sovereignty. The Governing Council considers that the
achievement of sustainable development involves co- operation
within and across national boundaries. It implies progress toward
national and international equity, including assistance to
developing countries in accordance with their national development
plans, priorities and objectives. It implies, further, the
existence of a supportive international economic environment that
would result in sustained economic growth and development in all
countries, particularly in developing countries, which is of major
importance for sound management of the environment. It also implies
the maintenance, rational use and enhancement of the natural
resource base that underpins ecological resilience and economic
growth. Sustainable development further implies incorporation of
environmental concern and considerations in development planning
and policies, and does not represent a new form of conditionality
in aid or development financing.' "—Official Records of the
General Assembly, Forty-first Session, Supplement No. 25 (A/4425),
UNEP/GC, 15/12 decision 15/2, Annex II.
- If
developing countries had been required to meet the environmental
standards that prevailed in the United States, they would have
incurred direct pollution control costs of $5.5 billion in 1980
with respect to their exports of manufactures to OECD countries,
which amounted to 848 billion. In addition, it has been estimated
that, if the pollution control expenditures associated with the
materials that went into the final product were also counted, the
costs would have risen to $14.2 billion. This is probably an
underestimate, as it relates only to the impact of environmental
pollution and does not allow for the costs of soil degradation,
deforestation, desertification and other deterioration of
resources. Source: A/42/42y, Annex.
- "There
is general agreement that if present emissions trends continue, a
rise of global mean temperature could occur in the first half of
the next century that would be greater than any in the history of
civilization." "The Full Range of Responses to Anticipated Climatic
Change", UNEP and the Beijer Institute, April 1989, p. xi.