Environmental ethics, sustainability and decisions: literature problems and suggested solutions
Environmental ethics, sustainability and decisions: literature problems and suggested solutions
复制标题
环境伦理、可持续性和决策：文献问题和建议的解决方案
DOI：
10.1080/00207233.2024.2317560
复制
发表时间：
2024
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Phoebe Koundouri
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Phoebe Koundouri
作者认为，环境可持续性是一个伦理问题，原因有三个[1]。首先，对于普通大众来说，可持续发展不值得追求，除非是出于道德原因（制度对于塑造行为至关重要）。其次，对于决策者来说，环境可持续性需要道德决策来实现这一目标（制度对于提出价值观至关重要）。第三，对于可持续发展科学家来说，必须使用一致和透明的研究策略来分析可持续性，无论采用何种可持续发展的伦理方法（研究人员必须声明背后的伦理假设，以及所采用的可持续发展范式的伦理影响）。本书总结了环境伦理、可持续性和相关决策的主要概念，并为学习环境伦理、可持续性和决策提供了一致且透明的顺序。第二章提出了许多环境伦理规则和伦理原因，但它的重点是在目的论（以目的为导向）方法中最大化平均福利（即行动有目标），并在义务论（基于原则）方法中最小化资源不平等（即行动不基于其后果）。第3章介绍了许多可持续性范式，但它重点关注弱可持续性以最大化福利和强可持续性以最小化不平等。第四章介绍了两种主要的决策类型（政策和项目），但重点关注基于政策（税收、标准、补贴和许可证）和项目（成本效益分析）的决策，其目标是福利最大化和实现效率，以及政策（国家法律和法规、双边和多边协议）和项目（多标准分析），以最大限度地减少不平等和实现公平。因此，这本书非常值得一读，以了解环境伦理、可持续性和决策的主要背景和参考资料。我特别欣赏表 1 和表 2，它们分别总结了主要的目的论环境伦理学和义务论环境伦理学。表3总结了介于纯生态模型和纯经济模型之间的两种主要可持续发展范式，以及基于社会生态连续性最大化或社会生态影响最小化的中间范式。图 4 和图 5 分别描绘了生态平衡和社会平衡。表 5 和表 7 分别总结了污染和资源（可再生或不可再生）复杂模型的主要参考文献。表 10 和表 11 分别总结了政策和协议对个人和国家的实际影响的主要参考资料。其次，本书对于强调环境伦理、可持续性和决策之间的主要相互作用也很有价值。我特别欣赏目的论方法（道德方面）、弱可持续性、效率（政策方面）和成本效益分析（项目中）与义务论方法（道德方面）、强可持续性、公平性（政策方面）和多标准分析（项目方面）的顺序。在可持续性范式中，弱可持续性使用的单一单位被视为弱点（即自然资本可以被其他类型的资本取代），但也被视为优势（即可以通过适当使用折扣因子来最大化连续性）。同样，强大的可持续性使用的许多单位被视为一种优势（即必须保护自然资本，无论其他类型的资本如何），但也被视为一种弱点（即
The author maintains that environmental sustainability is an ethical issue for three key reasons [1]. First, for the general population, sustainability is not worth pursuing unless it is achieved for ethical reasons (institutions are crucial for shaping behaviours). Second, for decision-makers, environmental sustainability requires ethical decisions to achieve this goal (institutions are essential for suggesting values). Third, for sustainability scientists, sustainability must be analysed using a consistent and transparent research strategy, regardless of the ethical approach to sustainability that is adopted (researchers must declare the ethical assumptions behind, and the ethical implications from, the adopted sustainability paradigm). This book summarises the main concepts in environmental ethics, sustainability, and the associated decisions, and offers a consistent and transparent sequence for learning about environmental ethics, sustainability, and decisions. Chapter 2 presents many environmental ethical rules and ethical reasons, but it focuses on maximising the average welfare within the teleological (purpose-oriented) approaches (ie actions have a goal) and minimising resource inequalities within the deontological (principle-based) approaches (ie actions are not based on their consequences). Chapter 3 presents many sustainability paradigms, but it focuses on weak sustainability to maximise welfare and strong sustainability to minimise inequalities. Chapter 4 presents two main types of decision (policies and projects), but it focuses on the decisions based on policies (taxes, standards, subsidies, and permits) and projects (costbenefit analysis), with the goal being to maximise welfare and to achieve efficiency, and on policies (national laws and regulations, bilateral and multilateral agreements) and projects (multi-criteria analysis) to minimise inequalities and to achieve equity. Thus, this book is well worth reading to discover the main contexts and references for environmental ethics, sustainability, and decisions. In particular, I appreciated Tables 1 and 2 that summarise the main teleological environmental ethics and deontological environmental ethics, respectively. Table 3 sums up the two main sustainability paradigms that lie on the spectrum between a pure ecological model and a pure economic model, together with intermediate paradigms based on the maximisation of social-ecological continuity or the minimisation of social-ecological impacts. Figures 4 and 5 depict ecological and social equilibria, respectively. Tables 5 and 7 summarise the main references to complicated models for pollution and resources (renewable or non-renewable), respectively. Tables 10 and 11 sum up the main references to the real impacts of policies and agreements for individuals and countries, respectively. Next, this book is also valuable for highlighting the main interactions between environmental ethics, sustainability, and decisions. In particular, I appreciated the sequence from a teleological approach (in ethics), weak sustainability, efficiency (in policies) and cost-benefit analysis (in projects) vs. a deontological approach (in ethics), strong sustainability, equity (in policies) and multi-criteria analysis (in projects). Within sustainability paradigms, the single unit used by weak sustainability is presented as a weakness (ie natural capital can be replaced by other types of capital), but also as a strength (ie continuity can be maximised by properly using a discount factor). Similarly, the many units used by strong sustainability are presented as a strength (ie natural capital must be preserved, regardless of other types of capital), but also as a weakness (ie