Environment and wildlife ethics for co-existence

Dr N Munal Meitei *

Environmental ethics is the philosophy that studies the ethical relationship between human beings and the environment. Environmental ethics has given a new dimension to the conservation of natural resources.

Human beings are a part of the ecosystem and so are the other living beings. When we talk about the philosophical principle that guides our life, we often ignore the fact that even plants and animals are a part of our lives. They are an integral to our environment and hence have a right to be considered as a part of our moral and ethical values.

We are continuing with an excessive consumption of natural resources. Their excessive use is resulting in their depletion, risking our own life and future generations. Is this ethical? This is why; the issue of environmental ethics takes up.

Scientists like Rachel Carson and many others who led to consider the philosophical aspect of environmental problems and ethics as a branch of environmental philosophy. This field received impetus when it was first discussed in the academic journals. Today, environmental ethics is one of the major concerns of mankind.

Wildlife ethics emphasis the human responsibilities to climate change, wildlife trade, cruelty, culling animals, confine, wildlife use, trade-offs, interfere in their lives, zoonotic diseases and zoo conservation programs.

The human population has reached 8.2 billion and half the world’s forestland has disappeared and the population of large mammals both on land and in sea has declined more than 70%. Species are on extinction something like 1,000 times more than the natural rate and the rate is still accelerating.

Expanding human demands on land, sea and fresh water, along with the impacts of climate change, have made the importance of conservation and management of wildlife. Wild animals have always been a critical resource for human beings.

Historically, food, medicine, fur and leather were key to human survival — more recently; wildlife has assumed high economic and cultural significance. Wild animals provide entertainment in wildlife parks, they form a central attraction in International tourism and they are key members of ecosystems on which humans rely for vital services.

In fact, most of International policies are underpinned by anthropocentric approach to environmental value. In most of the global debate, the ethical agenda is largely composed of resource management concerns (Palmer 2003).

The common cited definition of sustainable development is “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” is anthropocentric (Cafaro and Primack 2001).

Accordingly, it can be argued that species deserve to be protected and conserved insofar as they are good for people. The preamble to the Convention on Biodiversity, however, affirms the intrinsic value of biological diversity even before listing other values such as ecological, genetic and economic value (SCBD 2003).

Thus, both anthropocentric and biocentric approaches to environmental ethics create a false dichotomy between humans and nature and are thus not useful as an underpinning for modern wildlife conservation policies.

Richard Routley presented the “last man” argument, a thought experiment in which he asked if the last person on Earth, well knowing that no human being will ever inhabit the planet afterward and equipped with the means to eliminate all life on the planet, would be justified in doing so. It’s intuitively, “no” showing that there is moral value in human. Unlike economic value, which is measurable, intrinsic value is difficult to express and to prove.

The modern conservation paradigm requires that we overcome the dualism of human versus nature, which creates antagonism between conservationists and other people. This philosophy provides that the conservationists are not only defender of the natural world against the harmful impact of human actions but as one who realizes the superintendence both between people and between people and nature.

The overly increasing human population is exceeding the carrying capacity of our planet, the natural environment are being used for human habitation. Thus. human beings are disturbing the balance in the nature.

The harm we are causing to the nature is coming back to us by endangering our life as well the future generations. But environmental ethics brings out the fact that all the life forms on Earth have the equal right to live.

We are going against the Laws of nature by disturbing the true environmental ethics. We are being unethical in treating the plant and animals, which coexist in the ecosystem. By destroying the nature, we are depriving their right to live and our own.

Environmental and wildlife ethics is about inclusiveness of the rights of non-human, living or non-living existing on the planet. We all are a part our environment. The conservation of environment and wildlife is the need of the hour and also our moral ethics.