Environmental Ethics and Ecology

T O WAR D AN EN VI RO N MENT AL ET H IC

The normative question that is unanswered has to do with the nature of the
atte mpts to broaden the ethical responsibilities of business. All of the pre vi -
ousl y described attempts to develop broader notions of the good soci ety .d
prescribe a corresponding set of social responsibilities for corporations suffer
from the same problem. They are profoundly anthropocentric, that is t o say,
human ce nte re d. T his cha racte ristic le ave s the m lacking in a world be si e ge d
by e nvironme ntal proble ms that just a fe w ye ars a go W e r e se e n onl y as
quality-of-life issues, not survival issue s. All Al these e fforts to de al with
corporate responsibility and redefine the good life reflect the arrogance of
We ste r n cult ure wit h re spe ct t o its ap pr o ac h t o n at ure .
Although the social responsibility issue s that de veloped in the 1960s did
i ncl ude e nvironme ntal conce rns, these conce rns we re also large l y human
ce nt e re d. T he pu bli c p oli c y me asu re s pa sse d i n the 19 60s a nd 19 7 0s we re
ba se d o n the pr ote ctio n o f h um a n he alt h, n ot o n a co nce rn fo r t he p r ot e ct i on
of t he e nvironment for As own sake. The typical stakeholde r map incl ude s
st o c lt h ol d e rs , c re d it o r s, e m p l o ye e s, c o n s u me r s, go v e r n me n t, a n d s o f o rt h ,
but it ne ve r i n clu de s pl a nts an d ani m als o r n at ure i n ge ne r al, all o f whi ch
have a significant stake in corpor ate activitie s. T he social contract mode l ,
whi ch is ofte n use d to support ethical re sponsibilitie s, is a contract bet wee n
h u m a n be i n gs . T he n a t u r al w o r l d is ne ve r in c l u de d i n t he b a r g a i n .
Sc hol a rs sim pl y m ust t ake a b ro a de r e col o gi c al vie w a nd ab an do n
a n t h r op o l o gi c a l pe r s pe c ti ve . H u m a n b e i n gs a r e n ot t he ce n te r o f t he u ni ve rse ,
no r are t he y at t he ce nte r o f t he e a rth. T he y a re but o ne s pe cie s, al be i t a n
i m p o r t a nt o n e , i n a w o r l d p o p u l at e d b y t h o u s a n d s o f s pe c ie s. H u m a n be i n gs
could not survive without the e xiste nce of these spe cie s, whe re as othe r pl a n t a n d
a n i m al sp e ci e s c o ul d su r v i ve q u i te w e l l w it h o ut h u m a n i nt e r fe re nce . Humans
are positione d at the e nd of the food chain and thus stand to suffe r the most from
poisons introduced into the chain. T he y will be without s uste n a nce if a n y p ar t o f
t he f oo d ch ain is b r oke n . Hu m an s are ve r y v ulne ra b l e a n d d e p e n d e n t o n t h e
e n v i r o n m e n t f o r s u r v i v a l , a n d c a n n o t e x i s t with out t he se r vi ce s a nd
re so ur ce s the e nvi ro nme nt p r ovi de s.
E co no mi c gr o wth c an not t ake pl a ce wit ho ut t he a pp ro pri at e e n vi r on -
me nt al c on ditio ns t o s up po rt it . T he noti on th at poli c ym a k e r s h a ve t o a cce pt a
t r ade -o ff be twe e n e c on omi c gr o wth an d e nvi ro n me nt al p rote cti on in de ci si on s
ab out pu bli c an d c o rp or ate p oli c y no l on ge r m ake s se nse . T he tw o go al s a r e
c o n s i s t e n t w i t h e a c h o t h e r . T h e e n v i r o n m e n t m u s t b e p r o t e c t e d a n d enhanced
for economic growth to take place. If the environment is destroyed, as i s
t aki ng place in the Amaz on rain fore st, for exa mple, econo mic growth will
eventually come to a halt as resources are exhausted. All we will be left with is
a ravaged earth that cannot support human life, and perhaps not any form of life
at all. Economic growth that undermines the conditions for that growth is not
sustainable. This awareness must sink into Western conscious ness and become
a part of ethical thinking for any kind of reasonable theories