A UTILITARIAN ANALYSIS ON ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION
LA TROBE UNIVERSITY
MGT2BET: BUSINESS ETHICS
INDIVIDUAL LITERATURE REVIEW:
A UTILITARIAN ANALYSIS ON ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION
GIULIO SOLFRIZZI ID NUMBER:18046528
A UTILITARIAN ANALYSIS ON ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION
Environmental degradation is one of the most debated arguments through the ethic philosophers. Many theories have been advanced to justify and analyse which is the best behaviour humans should maintain in order to fulfil utilitarian doctrine and enhance social well-being. This review will focus on the main themes the utilitarian literature has analysed on this specific topic. These themes are: the impact of population growth on the maximisation of happiness, the act-utilitarianism criticisms, the importance of the future of the environment in the utilitarian view and the value of the cost-benefit analysis in order to evaluate the ethical worth of an action.
Most utilitarian theories about environment deal with the impact of population growth on the environmental deterioration. Some early philosophers, such as Jeremy Bentham (Bentham on population and Government, 1995) believed that the only effect that an increasing population may lead to is the improvement of social welfare. He contended emigration in most cases is not beneficial for a country because it may cause human capital losses, while population growth strengthen security and is beneficial for urban centres helping them to sprawl. Hence, in Bentham view population growth is not dangerous for the environment and it leads to the greatest level of happiness for the highest number of people concerned. Whereas, John Stuart Mill (Shaw, 2013), Gesang (2013) and Mulgan (2011) argue that an increase in population rates in a long-term perspective is detrimental for the environment. This argument is supported by Chapman in his utilitarian analysis on the effects of immigration on natural environments (2000). Loss of biodiversity, ocean overfished,
MGT2BET: BUSINESS ETHICS
INDIVIDUAL LITERATURE REVIEW:
A UTILITARIAN ANALYSIS ON ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION
GIULIO SOLFRIZZI ID NUMBER:18046528
A UTILITARIAN ANALYSIS ON ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION
Environmental degradation is one of the most debated arguments through the ethic philosophers. Many theories have been advanced to justify and analyse which is the best behaviour humans should maintain in order to fulfil utilitarian doctrine and enhance social well-being. This review will focus on the main themes the utilitarian literature has analysed on this specific topic. These themes are: the impact of population growth on the maximisation of happiness, the act-utilitarianism criticisms, the importance of the future of the environment in the utilitarian view and the value of the cost-benefit analysis in order to evaluate the ethical worth of an action.
Most utilitarian theories about environment deal with the impact of population growth on the environmental deterioration. Some early philosophers, such as Jeremy Bentham (Bentham on population and Government, 1995) believed that the only effect that an increasing population may lead to is the improvement of social welfare. He contended emigration in most cases is not beneficial for a country because it may cause human capital losses, while population growth strengthen security and is beneficial for urban centres helping them to sprawl. Hence, in Bentham view population growth is not dangerous for the environment and it leads to the greatest level of happiness for the highest number of people concerned. Whereas, John Stuart Mill (Shaw, 2013), Gesang (2013) and Mulgan (2011) argue that an increase in population rates in a long-term perspective is detrimental for the environment. This argument is supported by Chapman in his utilitarian analysis on the effects of immigration on natural environments (2000). Loss of biodiversity, ocean overfished,
References: -Chapman R. L. 2000. Immigration and environment: settling the moral boundaries. Environmental values, 21:189-201. -Gesang B. 2013. What climate policy can a utilitarian justify? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 20:377-392 -Goodstein E.S -Jamieson D. 2007 When Utilitarian Should Be Virtue Theorists. Utilitas, 19:160-183 -Mulgan T -Vineis P. 1995. Environmental risks: scientific concepts and social perception. Theoretical Medicine, 16: 153-169 -White A