Scientific evolutionary/ecological thinking is the basis for today's understanding that we are now in an ecological crisis. Religions, however, often resist reordering their thinking in light of ...scientific ideas, and this presents difficulties in trying to develop a viable global ecological ethic. In both the West and Asia religiomoral ecological concerns continue to be formulated largely in terms of traditional concepts rather than in more global terms, as scientific thinking about ecological matters might encourage them to do. The majority of this article is devoted to the kind of reformulation of Western Christian conceptions of God, humanity, and the relation between them that is necessary to address this problem. The question is then raised whether similar critical thinking about religiomoral issues raised by today's evolutionary/ecological scientific thinking is going on in Asian religions and whether it would be too presumptuous (in view of our colonial history) for us Westerners to ask for such rethinking. This leads to a final question: Without such transformations in religious traditions East and West, is the development of a truly global ecological ethic really feasible?
During the period of "National Twelfth Five-Year Plan", China has entered an age of rapid development for Highway construction. It need to regulate the ethical relationship between people and ...ecological environment to tackle the problem of ecological damage caused by highway construction, so it is both inevitable and necessary to promote ecological ethic in highway construction. Based on the theory of environmental ethic, the importance of ecological ethic in highway construction is proposed in the paper. The concept of ecological aesthetics in highway construction is analyzed and the relationship of ecological ethic and ecological aesthetics is described. The detailed analysis of the connotation and main ideas of ecological ethic are made to promote balanced development of ecological security of highway construction and transportation economic development.
Traditional communities have long been recognized as actors practicing nature-friendly behaviors. They are commonly deemed the champion of sustainable lifestyles. Since the 1980s, there has been a ...call to learn the so-called Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) embraced by traditional communities. One of the reasons is that the issues of climate crises should be addressed and tackled from various corners. This article attempts to delineate a TEK, an ecological ritual practiced by the traditional community living on the island of Sumba. The ritual, called WHL (warung hupu liku, which means giving the rope tips back to nature), could give us an idea of how the community perceives their relationship with natural surroundings, which in turn, exposes their ecological ethics. Primary research data were collected through interviews with four experts of Sumbanese culture/environmental activists and two ritual speakers (wunang). The research reveals that WHL ritual portrays the Sumbanese’s worldview of the human-nature relationship. WHL gives an idea of the Sumbanese ecological ethics, covering reciprocity with nature, mutual respect, modesty in consumption, and sustainable use of natural resources. Because Indonesia is rich in TEK, this time-enduring knowledge and practice should be exposed as a valuable contribution to ecological discourses and policies. The discussion on Sumbanese WHL suggests that traditional and modern approaches could work in tandem to address current environmental issues.
Foregrounding ecojustice in conservation Washington, Haydn; Chapron, Guillaume; Kopnina, Helen ...
Biological conservation,
12/2018, Letnik:
228
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Justice for nature remains a confused term. In recent decades justice has predominantly been limited to humanity, with a strong focus on social justice, and its spin-off – environmental justice for ...people. We first examine the formal rationale for ecocentrism and ecological ethics, as this underpins attitudes towards justice for nature, and show how justice for nature has been affected by concerns about dualisms and by strong anthropocentric bias. We next consider the traditional meaning of social justice, alongside the recent move by some scholars to push justice for nature into social justice, effectively weakening any move to place ecojustice centre-stage. This, we argue, is both unethical and doomed to failure as a strategy to protect life on Earth. The dominant meaning of ‘environmental justice’ – in essence, justice for humans in regard to environmental issues – is also explored. We next discuss what ecological justice (ecojustice) is, and how academia has ignored it for many decades. The charge of ecojustice being ‘antihuman’ is refuted. We argue that distributive justice can also apply to nature, including an ethic of bio-proportionality, and also consider how to reconcile social justice and ecojustice, arguing that ecojustice must now be foregrounded to ensure effective conservation. After suggesting a ‘Framework for implementing ecojustice’ for conservation practitioners, we conclude by urging academia to foreground ecojustice.
•‘Justice’ in conservation is a confused term, focusing primarily on social justice.•Environmental justice remains focused on justice for humans on environmental issues.•Anthropocentric bias means that ‘ecological justice’ has largely been overlooked.•A ‘Framework for implementing ecojustice’ for conservation practitioners is proposed.•Ecojustice must now be foregrounded to ensure effective conservation.
The debate on Buddhist eco-ethics emerged in the late 20th century and continues to the present day, which fosters the intersection of Buddhist eco-ethics with environmental ethics. However, the ...current understanding of Buddhist eco-ethics still falls short of a holistic concept. To fill the gap, this paper argues that different macro perspectives should be considered in the process of developing a concept of holistic Buddhist eco-ethics. For this, we firstly attempt to clarify the dispute over the feasibility of Buddhist eco-ethics from the internal, external, and Buddhists’ perspectives. Then, we address the dispute concerning the classification of Buddhist eco-ethics, proposing a typology that accommodates different perspectives. Finally, two methods are suggested to mediate the dispute over Buddhist eco-ethics and justify its holistic concept, that is, regarding Buddhist eco-ethics as a form of virtue ethics and as a product of “engaged Buddhism.” Here, it is also emphasized to include Buddhists’ perspectives when mediating the dispute. Accordingly, we put forward a holistic concept for Buddhist eco-ethics that incorporates three main macro perspectives: ecological ethics in Buddhism, Buddhism in ecological ethics, and Buddhists’ environmental activities. It is hoped that the wisdom of Buddhist eco-ethics can help us forge a path towards a more harmonious and sustainable world in the near future.
•We suggest a ‘new’ ecological economics which foregrounds ecological ethics.•A new ecological economics could de-commodify nature.•A new ecological economics could promote Earth jurisprudence and ...ecojustice.•Models of ecological economics are compared re limits, equity, and ethics.•The steady state economy compares best of all models.
Neoclassical economics has been dominated by anthropocentrism. We argue that much of ecological economics (EE) is now also dominated by this. EE should now break-free from anthropocentrism, including the commodification of nature. We suggest a ‘new’ ecological economics which foregrounds an ecocentric worldview, ecological ethics and ecojustice. These can assist society to reach a truly sustainable future where it accepts nature’s intrinsic value and extends respect to the nonhuman world. Models associated with EE are considered in terms of their approach to ecological limits and equity, as well as ethics. The paper concludes the only EE model that comes close to foregrounding ecological ethics is the steady state economy. Most of the others explicitly (or implicitly) retain an anthropocentric bias. Four approaches to ‘moving forward’ are suggested: achieving ecocentrism; advocating Earth jurisprudence; supporting ecojustice; and dealing ethically with the commodification of nature. We argue that a rejuvenated EE should de-commodify nature. Hence we should consider ‘People’s Contributions to Nature’, rather than just ‘Nature’s Contributions to People’. For both practical and ethical reasons, the paper concludes that EE needs to reevaluate its worldview and ethics. A possible research agenda is suggested that could help integrate ecological ethics with ecological economics.
In this paper we provide an analysis of the “new conservation debate,” a still-evolving dispute in which conservation scientists and advocates defending a strong protected-areas approach (“nature ...protectionists”) have become pitted against more development-oriented conservationists (“social conservationists”) intent on reforming the dominant protected areas model to embrace sustainable use and poverty alleviation efforts. We focus in particular on identifying and clarifying the divergent normative and descriptive claims made by the two camps in the debate, an activity that we suggest will improve communication and understanding among conservationists. We suggest that more explicit discussion of the value and ethical dimensions of this debate is needed, and describe efforts to reduce value conflict and harmonize ethical positions. We conclude with a discussion of emerging planning and policy models that may facilitate a convergence of values in the new conservation debate on a common policy of eco-social sustainability.
PDF
