Discrimination and bias in the vegan ideal

The vegan ideal is entailed by arguments for ethical veganism based on traditional moral theory (rights and/or utilitarianism) extended to animals. The most ideal lifestyle would abjure the use of animals or their products for food since animals suffer and have rights not to be killed. The ideal is discriminatory because the arguments presuppose a male physiological norm that gives a privileged position to adult, middle-class males living in industrialized countries. Women, children, the aged, and others have substantially different nutritional requirements and would bear a greater burden on vegetarian and vegan diets with respect to health and economic risks, than do these males. The poor and many persons in Third World nations live in circumstances that make the obligatory adoption of such diets, where they are not already a matter of sheer necessity, even more risky.Traditional moral theorists (such as Evelyn Pluhar and Gary Varner whose essays appear in this issue) argue that those who are at risk would beexcused from a duty to attain the virtue associated with ethical vegan lifestyles. The routine excuse of nearly everyone in the world besides adult, middle-class males in industrialized countries suggests bias in the perspective from which traditional arguments for animal rights and (utilitarian) animal welfare are formulated.     

Risk-taking and environmental perception

This paper investigates the relationship between pupils' environmental perception (in terms of preservation and utilisation of nature) and personality (in terms of risk-taking). 713 secondary school pupils in Switzerland were investigated. Environmental perception was assessed via three factors: Preservation, Utilisation of Nature and Consideration for Conservation. Risk-taking was evaluated via six factors: Positive Risking, Ambivalence, Thrill in Gambling, Ineffective Control, Effective Control, and Anger Reaction. Analysis of the correlation matrix between Risk-taking and Environmental perception revealed three profiles (types): the high scorer on Preservation is the controlled and cautious gambler. The Utiliser (anthropocentric) profile is essentially a mirror image of the first: the Utiliser does not enjoy unpredictable risks, reacts with anger when risks fail and has little control over his/her own risk-taking behaviour. The Consideration for Conservation (ecocentric) profile assumes a position between these two profiles.     

Vegetarianism,morality, and science revisited

Professor Kathryn George's Use and Abuse Revisited does not contain an accurate assessment of my On Vegetarianism, Morality, and Science: A Counter Reply. I show that she has misrepresented my moral and empirical argumentation.     

On vegetarianism,morality, and science: A counter reply

I recently took issue with Kathryn George's contention that vegetarianism cannot be a moral obligation for most human beings, even assuming that Tom Regan's stringent thesis about the equal inherent value of humans and many sentient nonhumans is correct. I argued that both Regan and George are incorrect in claiming that his view would permit moral agents to kill and eat innocent, non-threatening rights holders. An unequal rights view, by contrast, would permit such actions if a moral agent's health or life is at stake. I then argued that current nutritional research does not support Professor George's claim that some wealthy adult males (and many fewer wealthy women) are the only persons whose health does not require the consumption of nonhuman animals and their products. In her 1992 response to my critique, George did not address my moral argumentation. She concentrated her entire paper on a wholesale rejection of my discussion of nutrition. Although she now takes a somewhat more moderate position on who can safely contemplate strict vegetarianism, she still believes that most people are not in a position to follow such a diet. In my counter-reply, I argue that her rejection is based upon numerous distortions, omissions, and false charges of fallacy. She even devotes a substantial section of her paper to criticizing me for saying the opposite of what I actually wrote. As I did in my earlier paper, I cite current research, including George's own preferred source on the topic of vegetarianism, to support my view. I conclude that Professor George has still not shown that for most human beings it is dangerous to follow a diet that omits nonhuman animals and their products. Moral agents who take the rights of humansand nonhumans seriously will find vegetarianism well worth considering.     

Two paradigms of professional development in environmental education

Summary In environmental education in this information age, it is particularly important to adopt the approach of enquiring critically into the environmental, educational and social values informing environmental, educational and social actions when and where required, rather than to simply adopt the approach of emphasising the acquisition and retention of information of an alleged universal type — information drawn from the stockpile of objective knowledge collected by others. This paper argues that to achieve this aim, environmental education in an information age requires aparadigm shift in the areas of professional development — a shift from a paradigm of information technology to a paradigm of information critique. A perspective on the form of this paradigm shift in the particular field of professional development in environmental education is the subject of this paper.Dr Ian Robottom is Senior Lecturer in the Curriculum Studies Centre of the School of Education, at Deakin University, Australia. His main interests lie in teacher education, educational enquiry, and environmental education. He conducts an off-campus environmental education course (B.Ed level) for practising teachers studying at a distance, is a member of the Council of the Australian Association for Environmental Education., and Editor of theAustralian Journal of Environmental Education.     

Melanesian axiology,communal land tenure,and the prospect of sustainable development within Papua New Guinea

It is the contention of this paper that some progress in alleviating the social and environmental problems which are beginning to face Papua New Guinea can be achieved by supporting traditional Melanesian values through maintaining the customary system of communal land tenure. In accordance with this aim, I will proceed to contrast certain Western attitudes towards individual freedom, selfinterested behaviour, individual and communal interests and private ownership with attitudes and values expressed in the traditional Melanesian approach. In order to demonstrate the latter, I will briefly touch upon the phenomenon of wantokism and indicate how the Melanesian values associated with this concept find their locus in the system of customary communal ownership. Subsequently, I will describe how the emergence of a cash economy and the attachment to Western gadgetry and products have effected injury to the environment and undermined values which have previously maintained Melanesian social cohesion. While admitting that little can be done to eradicate the desire for cash and the products it can buy, I suggest that Melanesian communities and the environment itself would receive more protection if future development in Papua New Guinea embraced a system which incorporated certain of the traditional Melanesian values through the preservation of the communal form of land tenure. Ultimately, I suggest a way in which customary communal land tenure can be integrated into the established Anglo-Australian legal system.     

When is it morally acceptable to kill animals?

Professor Hugh Lehman has recently argued that the rights view, according to which nonhuman animals have a prima facie right to life, is compatible with the killing of animals in many circumstances, including killing for food, research, or product-testing purposes. His principle argument is an appeal to life-boat cases, in which certain lives should be sacrificed rather than others because the latter would allegedly be made worse-off by death than the former. I argue that this reasoning would apply to so-called inferior humans just as much as to animals, and that this appeal is unsuccessful in any case. I distinguish two versions of the rights view: the equal and the unequal rights views. Although the unequal rights view, unlike the equal rights view, would sanction the killing of animals (and some humans) for food under severely restricted circumstances, neither rights view sanctions the raising of animals for their meat. Moreover, neither rights view would sanction the killing of animals for research or product-testing purposes. I conclude with a brief discussion of the merits of phasing out the meat production industry.     

Arsenic levels in the marine ecosystem off the Kuwait coast, Arabian Gulf

Arsenic levels in seawater, microplankton (diatoms and dinoflagellates), shrimp (Penaeus semisulcatus), mollusc (Cerithium scabridum) and five types of fish (Maid, Nakroor, Nuwaiby, Suboor and Sheim) in five sampling stations (I–V) off the Kuwait coast were determined during the years 1995 to 1999. The maximum mean concentration of arsenic was observed in the order; the five fish (0.50–0.78 g g^–1)> mollusc (0.26 g g^–1)> shrimp (0.23 g g^–1)> particulate matter (0.03 g g^–1)> water and phytoplankton (0.02 g g^–1) from all the sites of the Kuwait coast. Station II possessed the maximum arsenic levels. In comparison with the arsenic levels in other parts of the globe, low arsenic levels were observed in most of the marine organisms off the Kuwait Coast. However, an increasing trend in arsenic concentrations was anticipated due to rapid local industrialization and on account of recent spills of arsenic compounds.     

Trade-Based Carbon Sequestration Accounting

This article describes and illustrates an accounting method to assess and compare early carbon sequestration investments and trades on the basis of the number of standardized CO₂ emission offset credits they will provide. The gold standard for such credits is assumed to be a relatively riskless credit based on a CO₂ emission reduction that provides offsets against CO₂ emissions on a one-for-one basis. The number of credits associated with carbon sequestration needs to account for time, risk, durability, permanence, additionality, and other factors that future trade regulators will most certainly use to assign official credits to sequestration projects. The method that is presented here uses established principles of natural resource accounting and conventional rules of asset valuation to score projects. A review of 20 early voluntary United States based CO₂ offset trades that involve carbon sequestration reveals that the assumptions that buyers, sellers, brokers, and traders are using to characterize the economic potential of their investments and trades vary enormously. The article develops a universal carbon sequestration credit scoring equation and uses two of these trades to illustrate the sensitivity of trade outcomes to various assumptions about how future trade auditors are likely to score carbon sequestration projects in terms of their equivalency with CO₂ emission reductions. The article emphasizes the importance of using a standard credit scoring method that accounts for time and risk to assess and compare even unofficial prototype carbon sequestration trades. The scoring method illustrated in this article is a tool that can protect the integrity of carbon sequestration credit trading and can assist buyers and sellers in evaluating the real economic potential of prospective trades. Published online     

A rotational groups system approach for interdisciplinary research

Environmental research is characterized in each of its successive phases by a strong interdisciplinarity. A rotational groups system (RGS) method is proposed as an instrument to encourage interaction among researchers from fields that are traditionally far apart. Meetings conducted with the RGS procedure involve all the researchers, who, in repeated and topical encounters, are able to exchange information on a wide variety of environmental subjects. These meetings can be arranged according to a special calendar, through a series of phases treating different aspects of the same subjects to be discussed, and above all, referring to specific themes and working guidelines organized on the basis of criteria designed to favor an exchange of ideas and constructive discussion. At the end, the plenary assembly edits an overall resume of the proceedings, and votes on the final resolution, which brings together all the conclusive opinions regarding the themes discussed.     

Is there a morally relevant difference between human and animal nonpersons?

It is commonly believed that we humans are justified in exploiting animals because we are higher beings:persons who have highly complex, autonomous lives as moral agents. However, there are many marginal humans who are not and never will be persons. Those who think it is permissible to exploit animal nonpersons but wrong to do the same to human nonpersons must show that there is a morally relevant difference between the two groups. Speciesists, who believe that membership in a species whose normal adults are persons is sufficient for a right to life, attempt to do just this. As the failure of the best arguments which can be marshalled on their behalf indicates, they are unable to justify their view. I conclude that, although there is a morally relevant difference between human nonpersons and most animal nonpersons, this difference is not an indication of superior moral status. We would do better to abandon speciesism and the assumption thatpersonhood is morally paramount for a view which implies that both human and nonhuman nonpersons are morally considerable and have a right to life.     

Sustainable wetland management strategies under uncertainties

Wetlands are widely recognized as transitional areas between terrestrial and aquatic systems. They provide multifunctional benefits, most prominently relating to the ecosystem, the economy and to scenic quality. Extensive areas of wetlands have been lost, either as a direct result of redesignation for other uses, especially industrial and recreational, or by qualitative degradation arising from water pollution. Although researchers have been involved in prolonged debate over wetland sustainable use management issues, the uncertain substitutability and irreversibility factors surrounding wetland functions have rarely been addressed. In considering policies for wetland resource management, decision rules and procedures must be adapted to reflect those uncertainties. In this study, the author incorporates the concept of the safe minimum standard of conservation approach to take account of natural and social uncertainties attending public decisions. By this approach, not only is the role of uncertain substitutability and irreversibility prioritized in addressing wetland sustainable use management strategies, but related policy implications may also be considered.     

The evolution of sustainability

Six separate but related strains of thought have emerged prominently since 1950 in discussions of such phenomena as the interrelationships among rates of population growth, resource use, and pressure on the environment. They are the ecological/carrying capacity root, the resources/environment root, the biosphere root, the critique of technology root, the no growth/slow growth root, and the ecodevelopment root.Each of these strains of thought was fully developed before the word sustainable itself was used. Many of the roots are based on fundamentally opposing assessments of the future of mankind. Many of the roots, such as the ecology/carrying capacity root, are based on physical concepts, and they exclude normative values. Others, such as the ecodevelopment root, include such values as equity, broad participation in governance, and decentralized government.When the word sustainability was first used in 1972 in the context of man's future, in a British book,Blueprint for Survival, normative concepts were prominent. This continued to be the case when the word was first used in 1974 in the United States to justify a no growth economy.Sustainability was first used in a United Nations document in 1978. Normative concepts, encapsulated in the term ecodevelopment, were prominent in the United Nations publications.After about 1978, the term sustainability began to be used not only in technological articles and reports but also in policy documents culminating in the use of the term in the report of the summit meeting of the Group of Seven in 1989.The roots of the term sustainability are so deeply embedded in fundamentally different concepts, each of which has valid claims to validity, that a search for a single definition seems futile. The existence of multiple meaning is tolerable if each analyst describes clearly what he means by sustainability.     

A utopian perspective on ecology and development

Summary Effective communication concerning environmental issues can take a variety of forms. The following essay is offered as a metalogue, a piece of writing in which the writing itself illustrates the principles developed in the writing.International readers will be helped if they know that Jack Armstrong and Sergeant Preston are heroes of moralizing (and often jingoistic) radio dramas popular among children in the United States during the War years and that the Tom Mix Holster Set and the A-bomb Ring were premiums offered to children in boxes of cold cereal in the period after the War. These trivia illustrate the kinds of societal messages directed toward the generation of Americans who presumably will be running the country during the 1980s.The authors are a professor of Psychology and Ethology and a graduate student in International Development. Both attended Harvard University in the late 1950s and the University of California, Berkeley, in the early 1960s. Their autobiographical reflections have something to say about the motivation underlying the environmental movement and where these motivations are likely to lead in the near future.     

What's wrong with animalby-products?

Without looking beyond the conditions under which laying hens typically live in the contemporary U.S. egg industry, we can understand why the production and consumption of factory farmed eggs could be judged immoral. However, the question, What (if anything) is wrong with animal by-products? cannot always be adequately answered by looking at the conditions under which animals live out their productive lives. For the dairy industry looks benign in those terms, but if we look beyond the conditions under which milk cows live, we can better understand some animal rights activists' reasons for objecting to dairy products. The contemporary U.S. dairy industry requires a slaughter industry between one-seventh and one-third the size of the contemporary beef industry. Today, beef slaughter is vastly more humane than poultry slaughter, but if today's beef slaughter industry is judged emmoral, the contemporary dairy industry should be judged similarly immoral, because the two are wedded. This is the deep reason for moral suspicion of the dairy industry.     

Biosphere II: Meeting ground for ecology and technology

Summary Biosphere II is a new project to build a self-contained ecological system containing humans, plants, and as many other living organisms as necessary for long-term sustenance. Soviet space scientists have already designed Bios 3, simulating conditions on board a flight to Mars. In building Biosphere II, the Institute of Ecotechnics (IE), in collaboration with Space Biospheres Ventures, Decisions Teams Limited, The Environmental Research Laboratory associated with The University of Arizona, and Sarbid Limited, plan to build the prototype of an artificial world in which environmental and ecological processes can be observed closely; An educational, scientific, and ethical laboratory, Biosphere II will raise public consciousness of the interdependence of all life. It will also serve as a control world where possibly harmful environmental effects can be modelled before they reach a crisis stage. Eventually the biospheres are to be marketed and set up in space as the biosphere, no longer in conflict with but aided by human technology, puts forth its young upon other celestial bodies.Dorion Sagan's most recent books areMicrocosmos andOrigins of Sex, both co-authored with Lynn Margulis. He is working onBiospheres, a book on closed ecological systems which is to be published shortly.     

Desertification Control and Management of Land Degradation in the Thar Desert of India

India has 2.34 million km² of hot desert called Thar located in the north-western part of Rajasthan between latitudes 23°3 and 30°12 North and longitudes 63°30 and 70°18 East. The Indian desert is spreading annually over 12000 ha of productive land degrading it and slowly advancing towards the national capital New Delhi at the rate of 0.5 km per year. The Indian desert is characterised by huge shifting sand dunes; high wind speed; scarce rainfall; and intense solar radiation. Tremendous efforts have been made since the 1960s to arrest desertification and for ecological restoration of the Thar desert. An Ambitious afforestation programme including stabilisation of shifting sand dunes and creation of micro-climates through tree-screens and shelter-belt plantation was launched by the forest department of Rajasthan. A huge canal, 649 km long was also introduced to the Thar desert for ecological restoration.     

Environmental perceptions of Irish and Bavarian pupils: an empirical study

The present study deals with the evaluation of environmental/ecological perceptions of secondary school pupils. It has two major objectives. Firstly, to administer a measurement instrument to explore ecological/environmental perceptions for a sample of approximately 900 Irish secondary school pupils aged between 12 and 16 years. The operation and use of three subscales, environmental behaviour, utilization of nature and consideration for conservation, was based on a previous study undertaken in Bavaria, but its structure, dimensionality and reliability was further assessed using psychometric procedures. Secondly, the study monitored the differences in these dimensions between Irish and Bavarian pupils. Common items within the subscale structure were selected from both samples to form a truncated item selection and to function subsequently as the basis for the final factor analysis applied to the combined Irish–Bavarian sample. Comparisons on this basis indicated substantial differences in attitudes and environmental behaviour between pupils from both regions: the Irish sample favoured less conservational values, but more patronage for the utilization of nature and it revealed less willingness to take and plan action in individual environmental behaviour. In addition, the Irish sample disclosed a significantly greater gender difference in the two subscales.     

Obligations to animals are based on rights

Some feminist philosophers criticize the idea of human rights because, they allege, it encapsulates male bias; it is therefore misguided, in their view, to extend moral rights to non-human animals. I argue that the feminist criticism is misguided. Ideas are not biased in favour of men simply because they originate with men, nor are ideas themselves biased in favour of men because men have used them prejudicially. As for the position that women should abandon theories of rights and embrace an ethic that emphasizes care: women who made this choice would not so much liberate themselves from the patriarchy as they would conform to its representation of women as emotional, subjective and irrational. There is, then, no good reason to withhold ascribing rights to non-human animals, based on the criticisms of rights made by some feminists.Some of the material in the discussion of the feminist critique of rights originally appeared in my The Case for Animal Rights: A Decade's Passing inA Quarter Century of Value Inquiry: Presidential Addresses of the American Society of Value Inquiry, edited by Richard T. Hull, pp. 451–455. Amsterdam and Atlanta, GA: Rodopi, 1994. These passages are reprinted with the permission of the editor and publisher, whose thoughtful co-operation is gratefully acknowledged.     

On the moral acceptability of killing animals

According to a rights view it is acceptable to kill animals if they are innocent threats or shields or are in a lifeboat situation. However, according to advocates of such a view, our practices of killing animals for food or scientific research may be morally unacceptable. In this paper we argue that, even if we grant the basic assumptions of a rights view, a good deal of killing of animals for food and scientific research continues to be morally acceptable.