Example assignment
Assignment title: Critically discuss the role of ethics in environmental management
Planet Earth is now in the age of the Anthropocene; a geological age, defined by the
dominant influence of human-driven activities on the earth’s natural systems. This epoch has
seen vast changes to ways of living. The Industrial Revolution heralded vast economic
growth for western nations; however, this unfettered growth has drastically increased carbon
emissions and degraded the Earth’s ecosystem services, resulting in unprecedented changes
to the Earth’s climatic conditions (National Aeronautics and Space Administration 2016).
Environmental management encompasses a range of approaches, intended to prevent damage
to the Earth’s biosphere. These approaches may originate from varying attitudes and
worldviews. Examining value systems and ethical beliefs relating to the environment and
ecological issues, one may better understand approaches to environmental management.
Environmental management encompasses many diverse goals, approaches and stakeholders.
It can be seen as a process that analyses, and seeks to reduce, the effect of anthropogenic
activities on the natural environment. Daley and Kent offer a definition of environmental
management as being concerned with ‘meeting and improving provision for human needs and
demands on a sustainable basis with minimal damage to natural habitats and ecosystems’
(2013).
Ethics can be seen as the study of, or a set of beliefs about ‘what is morally right and wrong’
(Cambridge Dictionary 2019). Environmental management can be approached from varying
ethical or value systems, such as ecocentric, technocentric and anthropocentric approaches.
The ecocentric approach places nature at the core of its value system, emphasising respect for
biotic and abiotic components of ecosystems. Ecocentrism propagates the belief that nature
needs to be conserved and protected. Both anthropocentrism and technocentrism are human-
centred paradigms. The technocentric value system propounds the belief that human
ingenuity and technological advance can be used to master nature and to resolve
environmental issues (Gladwin 1995). Looking at environmental management as a holistic
framework, knowledge may be utilised from several different value systems or approaches. In
order to devise effective environmental management strategies, diverse and interconnecting
factors should be considered, such as social, environmental, and economic factors, combined
with adoption of environmentally sustainable technologies and processes.
An integrative approach to environmental management may be encapsulated by the
sustaincentric approach. Gladwin notes that sustaincentrism is both human-centred and
conservation-centred (1995). This paradigm identifies humans as custodians of the Earth,
responsible for preventing transgression of the Earth’s planetary boundaries. Gladwin further
states that sustaincentrism focuses ‘on interrelationships of causality, such as among poverty,
population, gender bias, overconsumption, and ecosystem degradation’ (1995, p. 894).
Regarding technology, Gladwin notes that ‘proponents of sustaincentrism are not
antitechnology, but they also do not accept it uncritically. Technologies should be developed
and employed in appropriate, just, and humane ways’ (1995, p.893). Sustaincentrism places
value on social-ecological interconnection:
Sustaincentrism advocates recognize that all human values depend on a healthy ecological, social,
and economic context. They seek a hierarchically organized and integrated system of values...to
guide practical action by differentiating grades of both instrumental and intrinsic value’
(Gladwin 1995, p.894)
Certain organisations are moving beyond solely meeting regulatory environmental
requirements, with the adoption of voluntary Environmental Management Systems (EMS), a
framework by which sustainable business activity can be conducted. Public sentiment,
political will and increased media coverage of environmental issues may be impetus for
organisations to voluntarily adopt an environmental management system. Further reasons
may include the need to meet growing societal demand for ethical goods and services (Zokaei
2013). Barrow notes that environmental management is multidisciplinary and utilises the
ecosystem approach; this holistic approach recognises the interconnected nature of
ecosystems, recognises the importance of drawing on local knowledge and involving key
stakeholders in the management process (Barrow 1999).
Introduction of an ethical framework and language may enable ethical practice to flourish.
Research carried out with Australian planners, into their ethical position around sustainable
land and community planning, revealed themes of an absence of ‘ethical literacy’ and general
professional confusion and inertia ‘about how to resolve ethical dilemmas as planners’
(Sarkissian et al. 2009, p. 218). Environmental management systems (EMS) such as the
International Organization for Standardization’s ISO-4001 and the European Union Eco-
Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) may offer businesses environmental literacy and
framing of environmental issues and solutions. Approximately 300,000 organisations in 171
countries around the world have achieved ISO 14001 (ISO 2019). Between October 2018 and
April 2019, 108 organisations became EMAS registered organisations (Europa 2019).
Unethical business behaviour can result in legal repercussions, increased regulatory costs,
loss of public trust and damage employee morale (Epley and Kumar 2019). Argandoña
suggests the voluntary, management-led approach has the greatest potential for creation of a
truly ethical management system (1999). An in-house, management-led approach to EMS,
affords an organisation the opportunity to define their own ethical code and goals; this may
involve input from stakeholders in the organisation, such as employees. Defining an ethical
code and identifying ethical goals may increase a sense of ownership towards EMS and
develop understanding into the reasons for implementing EMS, thereby encouraging
stakeholder buy-in (Argandoña 1999).
The United Nations (UN) Global Compact propound a principles-based approach as foundation
for conducting business in a truly sustainable manner. The UN Global Compact is the world’s
largest initiative for corporate sustainability. The initiative highlights the adoption of a
principles-based approach as key to companies conducting business in a sustainable manner.
This approach outlines ten principles in the areas of environment, human rights, labour and
anticorruption, stating that ‘establishing a culture of integrity’ enables companies to uphold
‘their basic responsibilities to people and planet’ and in doing so creates a foundation for ‘long-
term business success’ (UN Global Compact 2019). The UN Global Compact highlights the
business opportunities provided by operating in an environmentally and socially sustainable
manner; connection to social agenda may enable companies to better identify market needs, to
attract skilled people and provide long term benefit to both business and society (UN Global
Compact 2019).
Sustainable development principles offer a framework for sustainable ecosystem
management. The Brundtland Report defines sustainable development as ‘development that
meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet
their own needs’ (1987, p.41). Barrow posits that sustainability combines environmental and
resource management with social and economic development, offering a new standard that
illuminates risks, challenges and opportunities at a local and global level (1999). Daley and
Kent note the interconnection of environmental management with justice, propagating the
idea that on both a local and global scale, environmental management is ‘intimately linked
with pressing issues of justice and even of survival’ (2013).
This relates to the concept of climate justice. The concept of climate justice illuminates
ethical response to the climate crisis. Robinson highlights the humanitarian issues created by climate
change, as poor or disenfranchised communities are often most vulnerable to climate
change and possess the least resources in which to mitigate the negative impacts (2018).
Robinson calls for climate justice, advocating for disenfranchised communities’ plight to be
addressed as a global issue (2018). Martin et al. propound that a movement away from
growth paradigm and business as usual activity is not just imperative for continued human
well-being, but also bears moral implication for humanity (2016). Martin et al. further argue
that a profound transformation of societal values is required, advocating for values that place
care of the biosphere at its core (2016).
Now, more than ever before, humanity has been made aware of the destructive impact of
anthropogenic activity on the Earth’s ecosystems and natural resources, proven through
overwhelming scientific evidence (IPCC 2014). One may argue that this knowledge carries
with it an ethical responsibility to adapt our ways of living; that it is now an ethical duty to
adopt sustainable practices or to continue with business as usual (BAU) activity, with the
knowledge that such activity may hold dire consequences for planet Earth. The polarisation
of value systems around the environment is not beneficial to global discourse; the adoption of
integrative and holistic environmental management practices is required, that provide a
progressive framework to create socially just communities that operate within the limits of
the planetary boundaries.
Bibliography
Argandoña, A. (2004) On Ethical, Social and Environmental Management Systems, Journal
of Business Ethics, April 2004, Volume 51, Issue 1, pp 41–52, available:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000032350.51151.0d [accessed 6
Nov 2019].
Banjo, S. Wall Street Journal https://www.wsj.com/articles/inside-nikes-struggle-to-balance-
cost-and-worker-safety-in-bangladesh-1398133855
Barrow, C. J. (1999) Environmental Management: Principles and Practice, London; New
York: Routledge.
Brundtland, G. (1987) Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development:
Our Common Future [online], available: http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-
future.pdf [accessed 18 February 2019].
Cambridge Dictionary (2019) Ethics, available:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/ethics [accessed 5 Nov 2019].
Daley, B. & Kent, R. (2013) Environmental Science and Management [online] Centre for
Development, Environment and Policy (CeDEP), SOAS University of London,
available:https://www.soas.ac.uk/cedep-demos/000_P500_ESM_K3736-
Demo/unit1/page_10.htm [accessed 5 Nov 2019].
Daley, B. & Kent, R. (2013) Environmental Science and Management [online] Centre for
Development, Environment and Policy (CeDEP), SOAS University of London,
available:https://www.soas.ac.uk/cedep-demos/000_P500_ESM_K3736-
Demo/unit1/page_10.htm [accessed 5 Nov 2019].
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Who needs a Licence, Dublin: Environmental
Protection Agency, available: https://www.epa.ie/licensing/ipc/whoneedsalicence/
[accessed 5 Nov 2019].
Epley, N. and Kumar, A. (2019) How to Design an Ethical Organization, Harvard Business
Review, available: https://hbr.org/2019/05/how-to-design-an-ethical-organization
[accessed 6 Nov 2019].
Europa (2019) Eco-Management and Audit Scheme, available:
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/emas/emas_registrations/statistics_graphs_en.htm
[accessed 5 Nov 2019].
Gladwin, T., Kennelly, J., & Krause, T. (1995). Shifting Paradigms for Sustainable
Development: Implications for Management Theory and Research. The Academy of
Management Review, 20(4), 874-907. available: DOI: 10.2307/258959
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2014) Climate Change 2014 Synthesis
Report Summary for Policymakers, available: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/
[accessed 6 Nov 2019].
International Organization for Standardization (2019) ISO 14000 family – Environmental
management, Geneva: International Organization for Standardization, available:
https://www.iso.org/iso-14001-environmental-management.html [accessed 5 Nov
2019].
Martin, J. L., Virginie, M., Simberloff, D. S. (2016) The need to respect nature and its limits
challenges society and conservation science, Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, May 2016, 113 (22) 6105-6112, available: DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1525003113
Sachs, J.D., Schmidt-Traub, G., Mazzucato, M., Nakicenovic, N. and Rockström, J. (2019)
Six Transformations to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals, Nature
Sustainability 2, 805–814, available: doi:10.1038/s41893-019-0352-9
Sarkissian, W., Holfer, N., Shore, Y., Vajda, S., Wilkinson, C. (2009). Kitchen Table
Sustainability, New York: Routledge.
United Nations Global Compact (2019) The Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact,
available: https://www.unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc/mission/principles [accessed
5 Nov 2019].
Wood, S., Jones, S., Johnson, J., Brauma, K., Chaplin-Kramere, R., Fremier, A., Girvetzg, E.,
Gordon, J., Kappeli, C., Mandlee, L., Mulligan, M., O'Farrell, P., Smith, W.,
Willemen, L., Zhang, W., DeClerck, F. Ecosystem Services Distilling the role of
ecosystem services in the Sustainable Development Goals, Science Direct, 29 (2018),
70–82, available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.010
Zokaei, K. (2013) ‘Environmentally-friendly business is profitable business’, The Guardian,
14 Oct 2013, available https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-
business/environmentally-friendly-sustainable-business-profitable [accessed 18 Feb
2019
