Tesi etd-03302023-140534
Link copiato negli appunti
Tipo di tesi
Dottorato
Autore
ASSEFA, ANDEBET HAILU
URN
etd-03302023-140534
Titolo
Hierarchical Environmental Holism: Advancing the Intergenerational Realm of Environmental Justice through Intrinsic Value
Settore scientifico disciplinare
M-FIL/03
Corso di studi
Istituto di Diritto, Politica e Sviluppo - PHD IN HUMAN RIGHTS AND GLOBAL POLITICS: LEGAL, PHILOSOPHICAL, AND ECONOMIC CHALLENGES
Commissione
relatore Prof.ssa PIRNI, ALBERTO EUGENIO ERMENEGILDO
Membro Prof. MEYER, LUKAS
Membro Prof.ssa SANNELLA, ALESSANDRA
Membro Prof. MEYER, LUKAS
Membro Prof.ssa SANNELLA, ALESSANDRA
Parole chiave
- Environmental Justice
- Environmental Values
- Hierarchical Environmental Holism
- Intergenerational Justice
- Intrinsic Value
- Reverse Historical Climate Situation
Data inizio appello
01/12/2023;
Disponibilità
parziale
Riassunto analitico
This study aims to theoretically interconnect environmental justice, intergenerational
justice, and holistic accounts of environmental ethics. The study employed conceptual analysis and synthesis by exploring relevant theoretical avenues to achieve its purpose. In this study, I claimed that an intrinsic value-based understanding of environmental entities at collective levels should be fundamental to approaching intergenerational concerns about environmental justice. For this purpose, I also devised the notion of intrinsic value from the perspective of environmental ethics. So, the study proposed a version of intrinsic value by linking ideas from anthropocentric and non-anthropocentric views in the context of holistic environmental ethics. Furthermore, this version of intrinsic value is employed to show how hierarchical ideals of environmental holism apply to intergenerational justice and environmental justice. In Chapter 2, the study discussed how environmental holism is essential to justifying the present generation's environment-related moral responsibilities vis-à-vis the potential interests of future generations, which helps us to address some of the challenges posed by the non-identity problem concerning our duties for future generations. In theory, the hierarchical version of environmental holism gives us a bigger foundation for a moral unit of analysis and our own identity. Thus, I defended the notion of a generation that considers the members of the global community as an interconnected manifestation in the context of the IGJ and EJ. This can be regarded as a “parasol generation.” As such, this conception of generation is also crucial from the perspective of the IGJ that the study defends—the communitarian perspective of intergenerational justice. Moreover, as
briefly stated in the third chapter, the sources of the intrinsic value-based account of human-environment relations can be exemplified by referring to some indigenous perspectives on the
environment, such as the Māori People’s ideas of intergenerational environmental justice and
African views on human-nature relations as a characterization of “interconnectedness” in nature and relationality. In this regard, as some environmental ethicists indicate, environmentally sensitive indigenous knowledge should be recognized in the efforts of environmental policy and institutional architecture. However, although such indigenous insights are crucial sources for intrinsic value-grounded considerations, many states and other stakeholders do not seem to recognize their practical contributions. Similarly, in Chapter 4 of the study, I attempted to philosophically sketch some implications that intrinsic value-based views of the environment may have on issues in intergenerational justice, such as the challenges of short-termism and presentism, long-lasting EJ-focused institutions, and the institutional representation of the interests of future generations. Theoretically, I claim that the conceptual synthesis of intrinsic value-based environmentalism and a hierarchical account of environmental holism can constructively contribute to approaching these problems. In Chapter 5, I attempted to show that IGJ issues, such as climate justice, presume the recognition of the moral worth of natural systems, including the atmospheric system, that are meant to function naturally without being unnecessarily affected by anthropogenic overexploitation. Many anthropogenic actions, such as greenhouse gas emissions, affect the climatic system, regardless of the time period during which these actions took place. As such, the climate justice discourse should be seen within the framework of past and future normative challenges. In this context, the study briefly introduced a reverse-historical climate situation (RHCS) by supposedly putting developing countries in the historical milieu of industrialized nations, particularly to consider harmful historical emission induced responsibilities. Notably, I employed the RHCS as a thought experiment to consider the
possible normative implications it brings for climate justice. The RHCS has an instrumentally
motivational reason for states and other stakeholders to take unreserved collective actions against climate change, including those of responsibility arising from harmful past emissions. As such, the RHCS suggests the necessity of important normative reconsideration for a coordinated effort and response to the historical responsibilities of climate change. The same chapter underlined that climate change prompts an intrinsically crucial environmental challenge that requires collective action from many actors, including states worldwide. As such, there should be some difference in moral weight while considering being historically responsible for climate change under the conditions of the pre-industrial revolution period (when there were no alternative climate-friendly energy sources, and there was a lack of knowledge about the long-lasting negative impacts of GHG emissions) and the post-industrial revolution period (more or less, there are alternative climate-friendly energy sources and adequate scientific knowledge about the adverse impacts of GHG emissions). The study claims that the moral defect of the latter condition can be higher than the former and should be more excusable than the latter. Nevertheless, such considerations require further research.
justice, and holistic accounts of environmental ethics. The study employed conceptual analysis and synthesis by exploring relevant theoretical avenues to achieve its purpose. In this study, I claimed that an intrinsic value-based understanding of environmental entities at collective levels should be fundamental to approaching intergenerational concerns about environmental justice. For this purpose, I also devised the notion of intrinsic value from the perspective of environmental ethics. So, the study proposed a version of intrinsic value by linking ideas from anthropocentric and non-anthropocentric views in the context of holistic environmental ethics. Furthermore, this version of intrinsic value is employed to show how hierarchical ideals of environmental holism apply to intergenerational justice and environmental justice. In Chapter 2, the study discussed how environmental holism is essential to justifying the present generation's environment-related moral responsibilities vis-à-vis the potential interests of future generations, which helps us to address some of the challenges posed by the non-identity problem concerning our duties for future generations. In theory, the hierarchical version of environmental holism gives us a bigger foundation for a moral unit of analysis and our own identity. Thus, I defended the notion of a generation that considers the members of the global community as an interconnected manifestation in the context of the IGJ and EJ. This can be regarded as a “parasol generation.” As such, this conception of generation is also crucial from the perspective of the IGJ that the study defends—the communitarian perspective of intergenerational justice. Moreover, as
briefly stated in the third chapter, the sources of the intrinsic value-based account of human-environment relations can be exemplified by referring to some indigenous perspectives on the
environment, such as the Māori People’s ideas of intergenerational environmental justice and
African views on human-nature relations as a characterization of “interconnectedness” in nature and relationality. In this regard, as some environmental ethicists indicate, environmentally sensitive indigenous knowledge should be recognized in the efforts of environmental policy and institutional architecture. However, although such indigenous insights are crucial sources for intrinsic value-grounded considerations, many states and other stakeholders do not seem to recognize their practical contributions. Similarly, in Chapter 4 of the study, I attempted to philosophically sketch some implications that intrinsic value-based views of the environment may have on issues in intergenerational justice, such as the challenges of short-termism and presentism, long-lasting EJ-focused institutions, and the institutional representation of the interests of future generations. Theoretically, I claim that the conceptual synthesis of intrinsic value-based environmentalism and a hierarchical account of environmental holism can constructively contribute to approaching these problems. In Chapter 5, I attempted to show that IGJ issues, such as climate justice, presume the recognition of the moral worth of natural systems, including the atmospheric system, that are meant to function naturally without being unnecessarily affected by anthropogenic overexploitation. Many anthropogenic actions, such as greenhouse gas emissions, affect the climatic system, regardless of the time period during which these actions took place. As such, the climate justice discourse should be seen within the framework of past and future normative challenges. In this context, the study briefly introduced a reverse-historical climate situation (RHCS) by supposedly putting developing countries in the historical milieu of industrialized nations, particularly to consider harmful historical emission induced responsibilities. Notably, I employed the RHCS as a thought experiment to consider the
possible normative implications it brings for climate justice. The RHCS has an instrumentally
motivational reason for states and other stakeholders to take unreserved collective actions against climate change, including those of responsibility arising from harmful past emissions. As such, the RHCS suggests the necessity of important normative reconsideration for a coordinated effort and response to the historical responsibilities of climate change. The same chapter underlined that climate change prompts an intrinsically crucial environmental challenge that requires collective action from many actors, including states worldwide. As such, there should be some difference in moral weight while considering being historically responsible for climate change under the conditions of the pre-industrial revolution period (when there were no alternative climate-friendly energy sources, and there was a lack of knowledge about the long-lasting negative impacts of GHG emissions) and the post-industrial revolution period (more or less, there are alternative climate-friendly energy sources and adequate scientific knowledge about the adverse impacts of GHG emissions). The study claims that the moral defect of the latter condition can be higher than the former and should be more excusable than the latter. Nevertheless, such considerations require further research.
File
| Nome file | Dimensione |
|---|---|
Ci sono 1 file riservati su richiesta dell'autore. |
|