Norton’s <Emphasis Type="Italic">Sustainability</Emphasis>: Some Comments on Risk and Sustainability

Bryan Norton’s 2005 book Sustainability describes a pragmatic approach to environmental philosophy that stresses philosophy’s role as one of mediating between scientific and ordinary language. But on two topics, Norton’s approach is not pragmatic enough. In the case of his discussion of risk, he accedes to a scientific notion that fails to acknowledge the way that ordinary usage of the word risk involves pragmatic links to human action and moral responsibility. With respect to the word sustainability, his analysis fails to acknowledge important scientific work that characterizes the functional integrity of system cycling, opting instead for usage grounded either in economic accounting or in an even less substantive sense of a broad social movement for environmental improvement. On each of these topics, adherence to the pragmatic orientation of Norton’s philosophy results in a different analysis of the concepts in question.     

Norton and Passmore on Valuing Nature

Norton argues on pragmatic “Deweyan” grounds that we should cease to ask scientists for value neutral definitions of “sustainability,” developed independently of moral and social values, to guide our environmental policy making debates. “Sustainability,” like human “health,” is a normative concept from the start—one that cannot be meaningfully developed by scientists or economists without input by all the stake holders affected. While I endorse Norton’s approach, I question his apparent presumption that concern for sustainability for the future is at odds with and ought to trump concern for enhancement in the present of public opportunities to access the goods nature represents. I argue that the two are not separable in practice. I argue for Passmore’s position that unless we take care to enhance equitable access to the good and services nature represents in the present, we cannot succeed in promoting sustainability for future generations.     

Information and research systems in the service of decision-making

Summary When people are in government, they are always involved in some type of information communication, but for more than five years now I have been involved with the Congressional Research Service, CRS, an institution which is totally committed to research and transfer of information to the United States Congress. The Congressional Research Service works exclusively for congress—for al the members and all the committees; and CRS’s scope—information, reference and research—covers all subject areas, including environmental issues, which are of congressional interest. The inquiries from members and staff—by phone, letter or in person—exceed 400 000 a year, and the number of requests has increased at an average rate of almost 9 percent each year over the past decade. Small wonder the service employs about 825 people, 550 of whom are professionals. Gilbert Gude is Director of the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress, appointed by Librarian Daniel J. Boorstin in January 1977. Mr Gude’s career in public service began in 1953 when he was elected to the Maryland House of Delegates; he served as a Member of the Maryland State Senate from 1962–1966, before being elected to the US House of Representatives for the 8th District of Maryland in 1967. During his 10-year career in the House he served as ranking member of the Subcommittee on Conservation, Energy and Natural Resources of the Government Operations Committee and ranking member of the Committee on the District of Columbia; he was also a member of the Select Committee on Aging. Mr Gude’s legislative work concentrated in the areas of urban and regional affairs and environmental issues. He was a key sponsor of the bill creating the C&O Canal National Historical Park and developed a number of legislative initiatives involving the Potomac River. Mr Gude is Vice Chairman of the Board of Trustees of The Catholic University of America and a member of the National Academy of Public Administration. He is a former member of Members of Congress for Peace Through Law and former chairman of the 1976 Anglo-American Conference on Africa. Mr Gude received a B.S. from Cornell University in 1948 and an M.A. in public administration from George Washington University in 1958.     

Project approval,environmental assessment and public participation

Summary Assessing the desirability of large scale resource development is an extremely complicated process. In the past, the presumption has been that economic criteria were decisive. Lately, however, we have accepted the idea that social and environmental factors will affect the design and procedures of development, and, in extreme cases, may even indicate the abandonment of a project. Public input and formal environmental and social impact assessment have been accepted in principle, and the challenge is to incorporate them within an orderly and expeditious governmental decision process. This is a case study of such a process for Esso Resources Canada Limited's proposed heavy oil project at Cold Lake, Alberta, Canada. P. S. Elder was Gold Medallist and Law Review Editor upon graduating from the Faculty of Law, University of British Columbia (1965). Following his call to the Bar and graduate work at the University of London (London School of Economics), he was an aide to various Canadian federal cabinet ministers (1967–70) and taught law at the University of Western Ontario (1970–73). In 1973 Professor Elder joined the Faculty of Environmental Design, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada where he teaches legally related subjects. He has written widely in environmental law and policy, and public participation. In his free time Elder engages in municipal and provincial politics     

Pluralism,The Ethical Matrix,and Coming to Conclusions

The ethical matrix approach was developed by Prof Ben Mepham and his colleagues at the University of Nottingham in the early 1990s. Since then the approach has received increasing attention and has been used by several researchers in different projects related to assessing ethical impacts of different food production technologies and other policy options of societal concern. The ethical matrix is sometimes understood simply as a checklist of ethical concerns, but might also be seen as a guide to coming to conclusions on moral questions. The problem I discuss in this paper relates to how using the ethical matrix method as a decision guide can be combined with respecting pluralism. The aim of the paper is to suggest a framework making it possible to – at the same time – enhance public justification of judgments and respect pluralism. I argue that pluralism is fundamental to the ethical matrix approach; I distinguish between intuitionist principled pluralism and societal value pluralism; and I show how both kinds of pluralism imply restrictions on how conclusions can be made. No substantive moral decision principles can be allowed. Still, I argue, decision principles of a more epistemological or procedural character can be acceptable even within pluralism. The pragmatist principle of inquiry is defended as an account of moral problem solving compatible with both principled pluralism and value pluralism. When an ethical matrix is used within such a participatory inquiry process substantive conclusions can be drawn.     

A Pluralist–Expressivist Critique of the Pet Trade

Elizabeth Anderson’s “pluralist–expressivist” value theory, an alternative to the understanding of value and rationality underlying the “rational actor” model of human behavior, provides rich resources for addressing questions of environmental and animal ethics. It is particularly well-suited to help us think about the ethics of commodification, as I demonstrate in this critique of the pet trade. I argue that Anderson’s approach identifies the proper grounds for criticizing the commodification of animals, and directs our attention to the importance of maintaining social practices and institutions that respect the social meanings of animals. Her theory alone, however, does not adequately address the role of the state in this project. Drawing on social contract theory to fill this gap, I conclude that the state’s role in regulating the pet trade should be limited to ensuring the welfare of animals in the stream of commerce, not prohibiting their mass marketing altogether.     

Environmental Impact Assessment and Environmental Audit in Large-Scale Public Infrastructure Construction: The Case of the Qinghai–Tibet Railway

Large-scale public infrastructure projects have featured in China’s modernization course since the early 1980s. During the early stages of China’s rapid economic development, public attention focused on the economic and social impact of high-profile construction projects. In recent years, however, we have seen a shift in public concern toward the environmental and ecological effects of such projects, and today governments are required to provide valid environmental impact assessments prior to allowing large-scale construction. The official requirement for the monitoring of environmental conditions has led to an increased number of debates in recent years regarding the effectiveness of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and Governmental Environmental Audits (GEAs) as environmental safeguards in instances of large-scale construction. Although EIA and GEA are conducted by different institutions and have different goals and enforcement potential, these two practices can be closely related in terms of methodology. This article cites the construction of the Qinghai–Tibet Railway as an instance in which EIA and GEA offer complementary approaches to environmental impact management. This study concludes that the GEA approach can serve as an effective follow-up to the EIA and establishes that the EIA lays a base for conducting future GEAs. The relationship that emerges through a study of the Railway’s construction calls for more deliberate institutional arrangements and cooperation if the two practices are to be used in concert to optimal effect.     

Urban Environmental Management in Shanghai: Achievements, Problems, and Prospects

This article critically reviews the evolution of urban environmental management in Shanghai since 1978. Established in a transitional postsocialist economy and shaped by a spectacular urban redevelopment process, the current environmental management framework of Shanghai has succeeded in mitigating major industrial pollution and improving urban amenities with unprecedented pace and magnitude. However, it generally failed to take social equity and environmental justice issues into consideration. Based on Haughton’s models of sustainable urban development, this article proposes four priorities and five principles within the framework of a fair shares cities model for the future environmental management of Shanghai and briefly discusses their policy implications and implementation issues. The authors argue that Haughton’s approach is relevant to Shanghai’s case because the essence of his argument—the multidimensional equity principles—is the core of the concept of sustainable development.     

The Ways of Wickedness: Analyzing Messiness with Messy Tools

The revelatory paper, “Dilemmas in the General Theory of Planning,” by Rittel and Webber (Policy Sci 4:155–169, 1973) has had great impact because it provides one example of an emergent consensus across many disciplines. Many “problems,” as addressed in real-world situations, involve elements that exceed the complexity of any known or hoped-for model, or are “wicked.” Many who encounter this work for the first time find that their concept of wicked problems aptly describes many environmental disputes. For those frustrated with the lack of progress in many areas of environmental protection, Rittel and Webber’s work suggested a powerful explanatory hypothesis: Complex environmental problems cannot be comprehended within any of the accepted disciplinary models available in the academy or in discourses on public interest and policy. What should we conclude about the future of social improvements, and about the possibilities for rational discourse leading to cooperative action, with respect to this huge number of pressing public, environmental problems? Can we find ways to address environmental problems that improves the ability of communities to respond creatively and rationally to them? I will argue that, while the Rittel-Webber critique requires us to abandon many of the assumptions associated with a positivistic view of science and its applications to policy analysis, it also points to a more productive direction for the future of policy analysis. I will introduce “boundary critique,” developed within Critical Systems Theory (CST), an approach that offers some reason for optimism in dealing with some aspects of wickedness.     

Perceiving Land-Degrading Activities from the Lay Perspective in Northern China

Investigation into local peoples’ perceptions can produce useful information that could be incorporated into the decision-making process to help resolve environmental problems. Within the arena of land degradation, a number of studies have also been conducted to explore local peoples’ views of the problem. However, the perceptions of land-degrading practices of the general public have so far not been actively solicited. This study aimed to contribute to this area of research by adopting the psychometric scaling technique to empirically explore the lay public’s ecological risk perceptions of land-degrading activities in Minqin County in Gansu Province, northern China. The primary data were collected via a questionnaire survey (n = 1,138) administered between 14 and 31 December 2002. The major findings of the survey were: (1) Respondents perceived the ecological risks posed by different land-degrading activities to be different. (2) There was a considerable incongruence in the way in which mining of groundwater was conceived by experts and laymen, respectively. (3) Respondents were pretty unsure of expert knowledge. (4) Respondents’ ecological risk perceptions were significantly affected by their personal attributes. As far as the policy implications of these findings are concerned, this study accentuates that we must be aware of, and involved in, the environmental perceptions of the lay public in order to succeed in guiding any human-environment tensions along more sustainable trajectories and navigating the transition to sustainability.     

Current Status and Problems in Certification of Sustainable Forest Management in China

Forest certification is a mechanism involving the regulation of trade of forest products in order to protect forest resources and improve forest management. Although China had a late start in adopting this process, the country has made good progress in recent years. As of July 31, 2009, 17 forest management enterprises and more than one million hectares of forests in China have been certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). Several major factors affect forest certification in China. The first set is institutional in nature. Forest management in China is based on centralized national plans and therefore lacks flexibility. A second factor is public awareness. The importance and value of forest certification are not widely understood and thus consumers do not make informed choices regarding certified forest products. The third major factor is the cost of certification. Together these factors have constrained the development of China’s forest certification efforts. However, the process does have great potential. According to preliminary calculations, if 50% of China’s commercial forests were certified, the economic cost of forest certification would range from US$0.66–86.63 million while the economic benefits for the forestry business sector could exceed US$0.66–86.63 million while the economic benefits for the forestry business sector could exceed US150 million. With continuing progress in forest management practices and the development of international trade in forest products, it becomes important to improve the forest certification process in China. This can be achieved by improving the forest management system, constructing and perfecting market access mechanisms for certificated forest products, and increasing public awareness of environmental protection, forest certification, and their interrelationship.     

Environmental education research news

Summary It appears that Harvey’s mediating definition and structural model have in fact subsumed the substance of earlier definitions and models; it also appears that no definitions or models proposed since the completion of his work in 1976 are at variance. The same might also be said about Lucas’ in, about, and for analysis, and to Johnson’s definitional study. But these works do clearly lie ‘mostly unattended by professionals’ (Hungerfordet al., 1983). The basic problem apparently is one of communication—either those concerned are not aware of what each other are saying, or they choose not to acknowledge, discuss, or debate it, for what they must assume are sufficient reasons. A number of apparently viable definitions and models have been advanced; Harvey has provided an analysis of most, and proposed a middle ground. A basis for resolution exists.     

The Lyon-Turin High-Speed Rail: The Public Debate and Perception of Environmental Risk in Susa Valley,Italy

When the construction of the Lyon-Turin segment of the new European high-speed rail network was first publicly announced at the beginning of the 1990s, it immediately found fierce opposition from the inhabitants of Susa Valley, Italy, one of the areas to be cut across by such infrastructure. At issue were the project’s potential environmental impact and its consequences on public health. This study intends to clarify environmental risk perception and public debate between the national government, local advocacy groups, and the inhabitants of Susa Valley. Two major phases of public reaction were identified: (1) an initial rebellious period of no real dialog among the project’s major stakeholders (exemplified by the popular “No TAV” [No High Speed Train] movement), followed by (2) a yielding period of intense multilateral negotiations centered on the activities of the “Lyon-Turin Environmental Observatory.” The results of a qualitative cross analysis of the residents’ perception of the proposed high-speed rail revealed that public acceptance of risk in Susa Valley was influenced by the characteristics of hazards perceived by the residents and by the communicative approach used by the project’s various stakeholders. It also emerged that early dialog among all the parties involved was critical in forming a personal viewpoint on risk, which, once consolidated, defied new information and perspectives. Likely, a greater and earlier care taken by the other stakeholders to inform and consult the local population about the railway would have greatly eased the public debate.     

The Environmental “Risky” Region: Identifying Land Degradation Processes Through Integration of Socio-Economic and Ecological Indicators in a Multivariate Regionalization Model

The economic policy needs to pay increasingly more attention to the environmental issues, which requires the development of methodologies able to incorporate environmental, as well as macroeconomic, goals in the design of public policies. Starting from this observation, this article proposes a methodology based upon a Simonian satisficing logic made operational with the help of goal programming (GP) models, to address the joint design of macroeconomic and environmental policies. The methodology is applied to the Spanish economy, where a joint policy is elicited, taking into consideration macroeconomic goals (economic growth, inflation, unemployment, public deficit) and environmental goals (CO₂, NO _x and SO _x emissions) within the context of a computable general equilibrium model. The results show how the government can “fine-tune” its policy according to different criteria using GP models. The resulting policies aggregate the environmental and the economic goals in different ways: maximum aggregate performance, maximum balance and a lexicographic hierarchy of the goals.     

Building a Sustainable Future for Animal Agriculture: An Environmental Virtue Ethic of Care Approach within the Philosophy of Technology

Agricultural technologies are non-neutral and ethical challenges are posed by these technologies themselves. The technologies we use or endorse are embedded with values and norms and reflect the shape of our moral character. They can literally make us better or worse consumers and/or people. Looking back, when the world’s developed nations welcomed and steadily embraced industrialization as the dominant paradigm for agriculture a half century or so ago, they inadvertently championed a philosophy of technology that promotes an insular human-centricism, despite its laudable intent to ensure food security and advance human flourishing. The dominant philosophy of technology has also seeded particular ethical consequences that plague the well-being of human beings, the planet, and farmed animals. After revisiting some fundamental questions regarding the complex ways in which technology as agent shapes our lives and choices and relegates food and farmed constituents into technological artifacts or commodities, I argue that we should accord an environmental virtue ethic of care—understood as caretaking—a central place in developing a more conscientious philosophy of technology that aims at sustainability, fairness, and humaneness in animal agriculture. While technology shapes society, it also is socially shaped and an environmental virtue ethic of care (EVEC) as an alternative design philosophy has the tools to help us take a much overdue inventory of ourselves and our relationships with the nonhuman world. It can help us to expose the ways in which technology hinders critical reflection of its capacity to alter communities and values, to come to terms with why we may be, in general, disengaged from critical ethical analysis of contemporary agriculture and to consider the moral shape and trajectory and the sustainability of our food production systems going into the future. I end by outlining particular virtues associated with the ethic of care discussed here and consider some likely implications for consumers and industry technocrats as they relate to farming animals.     

Risk of public disclosure in environmental farm plan programs: Characteristics and mitigating legal and policy strategies

Although various studies have shown that farmers believe there is the need for a producer-led initiative to address the environmental problems from agriculture, farmers in several Canadian provinces have been reluctant to widely participate in Environmental Farm Plan (EFP) programs. Few studies have examined the key issues associated with adopting EFP programs based on farmers’, as opposed to policy makers’, perspectives on why producers are reluctant to participate in the program. A study adapting Van Raaij’s (1981) conceptual model of the decision-making environment of the firm, and prospect theory on value functions associated with the gains and losses from risky choices can be used to characterize how farmers perceive potential risks in environmental farm planning. This framework can be used to assert that farmers are concerned about risks of public disclosure of potentially incriminating environmental information from farms because the EFP program requirements for identification and extensive documentation of farm information is perceived by farmers as facilitating the accessibility of environmental information to the public, and public investigative efforts. Although the EFP program does not explicitly generate information about the environmental conditions of a farm nor the disclosure of such information to the public, it creates the possibility of generating and divulging potentially incriminating information that the farmer may want to treat as confidential. Yet, alone, these risks of public disclosure concerns should not prevent farmers from participating in the EFP. Awareness of and participation in environmental farm planning can be increased if farmers and policy makers understand what the risks are, and how they arise. Aspects of the EFP process that have the potential to generate risk of public disclosure concerns relate to farm reviews, documentation and record keeping, and corrective action plans. There are legal and policy instruments that can offer various forms of protection and help minimize such risks, and these need to be assessed.     

Consumer Autonomy and Availability of Genetically Modified Food

The European Union’s policies regarding genetically modified food (GMF hereafter) are based on the precautionary principle and the requirement of respecting consumers’ autonomy. We ask whether the requirement of respecting consumers’ autonomy regarding GMF implies that both GMF and non-GMF products should be available in the market. According to one line of thought, consumers’ choices may be autonomous even when the both types of products are not available. A food market with only GMF or only non-GMF products does not strictly speaking compel people to buy the type of products available, and a possibility to refuse to buy is enough for consumers’ choice to be autonomous. According to another line of thought, the unavailability of GMF or non-GMF products restricts the autonomy of those consumers who are unwilling to use the only type of products (GMF or non-GMF) available in the market. From the point of view of autonomy, a food market with only GMF or only non-GMF products does not offer enough alternatives for consumers. Moreover, the whole point of the European Union’s requirement of respecting consumers’ autonomy is to enable an autonomous choice between GMF and non-GMF—not just to give a possibility to refrain from buying. However, this does not imply that producers, processors, wholesalers, retailers, or public authorities have a moral duty to see that there are both GMF and non-GMF products available in the market. The requirement to respect autonomy is prima facie in nature, and in the context of GMF, other prima facie requirements are often stronger and override it. Not only the consumers’ autonomy of choice but also environmental values, other people’s well-being, and the autonomous choice of farmers, retailers, and other relevant parties should be respected. Thus, according to the both lines of thought, the requirement to respect consumers’ autonomy of choice does not imply that there should be both GMF and non-GMF products available in the market.     

The Fat of the Land: Linking American Food Overconsumption, Obesity, and Biodiversity Loss

Americans’ excessive consumption of food harms their health and quality of life and also causes direct and indirect environmental degradation, through habitat loss and increased pollution from agricultural fertilizers and pesticides. We show here that reducing food consumption (and eating less meat) could improve Americans’ health and well-being while facilitating environmental benefits ranging from establishing new national parks and protected areas to allowing more earth-friendly farming and ranching techniques. We conclude by considering various public policy initiatives to lower per capita caloric intake and excessive meat consumption, and to translate this temperate behavior into substantial environmental protection.     

Non-native Species <Emphasis Type="Italic">DO</Emphasis> Threaten the Natural Environment!

Sagoff [Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (2005), 215–236] argues, against growing empirical evidence, that major environmental impacts of non-native species are unproven. However, many such impacts, including extinctions of both island and continental species, have both been demonstrated and judged by the public to be harmful. Although more public attention has been focused on non-native animals than non-native plants, the latter more often cause ecosystem-wide impacts. Increased regulation of introduction of non-native species is, therefore, warranted, and, contra Sagoff’s assertions, invasion biologists have recently developed methods that greatly aid prediction of which introduced species will harm the environment and thus enable more efficient regulation. The fact that introduced species may increase local biodiversity in certain instances has not been shown to result in desired changes in ecosystem function. In other locales, they decrease biodiversity, as they do globally.     

The “Revolving Door” between Regulatory Agencies and Industry: A Problem That Requires Reconceptualizing Objectivity

There is a “revolving door” between federal agencies and the industries regulated by them. Often, at the end of their industry tenure, key industry personnel seek employment in government regulatory entities and vice versa. The flow of workers between the two sectors could bring about good. Industry veterans might have specialized knowledge that could be useful to regulatory bodies and former government employees could help businesses become and remain compliant with regulations. But the “revolving door” also poses at least three ethical and policy challenges that have to do with public trust and fair representation. First, the presence of former key industry personnel on review boards could adversely impact the public’s confidence in regulatory decisions about new technology products, including agrifood biotechnologies. Second, the ‘‘revolving door’’ may result in policy decisions about technologies that are biased in favor of industry interests. And third, the ‘‘revolving door’’ virtually guarantees industry a voice in the policy-making process, even though other stakeholders have no assurance that their concerns will be addressed by regulatory agencies. We believe these three problems indicate a failure of regulatory review for new technologies. The review process lacks credibility because, at the very least, it is procedurally biased in favor of industry interests. We argue that prohibiting the flow of personnel between regulatory agencies and industry would not be a satisfactory solution to the three problems of public trust and just representation. To address them, regulatory entities must reject the traditional notion of objectivity. Instead they should adopt the conception of objectivity developed by Sandra Harding and re-configure their regulatory review on the basis of it. That will ensure that a heterogeneous group of stakeholders is at the decision-making table. The fair representation of interests of different constituencies in the review process could do much to inspire warranted public confidence in regulatory protocols and decisions.