Embedded but overlooked values: Ethical aspects of absolute environmental sustainability assessments

IF 4.9 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL
Mia Heide, Mickey Gjerris
{"title":"Embedded but overlooked values: Ethical aspects of absolute environmental sustainability assessments","authors":"Mia Heide,&nbsp;Mickey Gjerris","doi":"10.1111/jiec.13472","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Currently used sharing principles (grandfathering and final consumption expenditure) do not align with the purpose of Absolute Environmental Sustainability Assessments (AESAs)—enabling all to meet basic needs within the planetary limits. This discrepancy, though niche within life cycle engineering, demands attention due to the integration of the sharing principles in the widely adopted Science Based Targets initiative, embraced by 4000+ companies, representing over a third of the global economy. This paper suggests operationalizing sufficientarianism as a fair sharing principle for AESAs guaranteeing a minimum threshold of well-being for all. The theory of human needs is highlighted to distinguish luxuries from necessities. This is vital when assigning shares to products/companies, as there's no room for luxuries (products for someone which cause others to fall short), given the extremely limited individual safe operating space, regardless of the sharing approach. This paper argues that sufficientarian-based sharing principles must overlook historically skewed material welfare distributions to ensure no one falls below the minimum threshold. It underscores the need for an interdisciplinary approach to sharing principles, acknowledging and discussing diverse value perspectives on equal grounds. The focus is to inform and discuss the development of new sharing principles, which introduces initial steps toward a sufficientarian-based approach. The paper concludes that recognizing embedded values is paramount in sharing principle development. Failing to do so risks letting quantifiable metrics dictate the values integrated into AESAs without open discourse.</p>","PeriodicalId":16050,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Industrial Ecology","volume":"28 3","pages":"386-396"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jiec.13472","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Industrial Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jiec.13472","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Currently used sharing principles (grandfathering and final consumption expenditure) do not align with the purpose of Absolute Environmental Sustainability Assessments (AESAs)—enabling all to meet basic needs within the planetary limits. This discrepancy, though niche within life cycle engineering, demands attention due to the integration of the sharing principles in the widely adopted Science Based Targets initiative, embraced by 4000+ companies, representing over a third of the global economy. This paper suggests operationalizing sufficientarianism as a fair sharing principle for AESAs guaranteeing a minimum threshold of well-being for all. The theory of human needs is highlighted to distinguish luxuries from necessities. This is vital when assigning shares to products/companies, as there's no room for luxuries (products for someone which cause others to fall short), given the extremely limited individual safe operating space, regardless of the sharing approach. This paper argues that sufficientarian-based sharing principles must overlook historically skewed material welfare distributions to ensure no one falls below the minimum threshold. It underscores the need for an interdisciplinary approach to sharing principles, acknowledging and discussing diverse value perspectives on equal grounds. The focus is to inform and discuss the development of new sharing principles, which introduces initial steps toward a sufficientarian-based approach. The paper concludes that recognizing embedded values is paramount in sharing principle development. Failing to do so risks letting quantifiable metrics dictate the values integrated into AESAs without open discourse.

Abstract Image

内含但被忽视的价值观:绝对环境可持续性评估的道德方面
目前使用的共享原则(不溯既往和最终消费支出)与绝对环境可持续性评估(AESA)的目的不一致--使所有人都能在地球极限范围内满足基本需求。这种差异虽然在生命周期工程学中是一个小问题,但由于共享原则已被广泛采用,并被 4000 多家公司(占全球经济总量的三分之一以上)所接受,因此需要引起关注。本文建议将 "充足主义 "作为 AESA 的公平共享原则,以保证所有人的最低福利标准。本文强调了人类需求理论,以区分奢侈品和必需品。这一点在分配产品/公司的份额时至关重要,因为无论采用哪种共享方式,在极其有限的个人安全操作空间内,都不可能有奢侈品(某人的产品会导致其他人的产品不足)的存在空间。本文认为,基于充分性的共享原则必须忽略历史上倾斜的物质福利分配,以确保没有人低于最低门槛。本文强调,共享原则需要跨学科的方法,在平等的基础上承认和讨论不同的价值观点。重点是为制定新的共享原则提供信息,并对其进行讨论,这是向基于充足资源的方法迈出的第一步。本文的结论是,在制定共享原则时,承认内含价值至关重要。如果做不到这一点,就有可能在没有公开讨论的情况下,让可量化的指标来决定纳入 AESA 的价值观。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Industrial Ecology
Journal of Industrial Ecology 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
11.60
自引率
8.50%
发文量
117
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Industrial Ecology addresses a series of related topics: material and energy flows studies (''industrial metabolism'') technological change dematerialization and decarbonization life cycle planning, design and assessment design for the environment extended producer responsibility (''product stewardship'') eco-industrial parks (''industrial symbiosis'') product-oriented environmental policy eco-efficiency Journal of Industrial Ecology is open to and encourages submissions that are interdisciplinary in approach. In addition to more formal academic papers, the journal seeks to provide a forum for continuing exchange of information and opinions through contributions from scholars, environmental managers, policymakers, advocates and others involved in environmental science, management and policy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信