Environmental Ethics

     Every environmental decision is made with the majority’s condition in mind. The minority group generally is less likely to gain some kind of benefit from the decision. For example, there have been many regualtions and laws put into place surrounding the endangered species that still live in specific areas of the Earth. The major “popular” animals, such as polar bears and whales, receive the most attention and the most protection but the smaller species are still in harms way as they do not receive the same attention.

     In another way, the human population’s health and safety are the government’s first priorities. The only way to make sure that people do not die is to maintain the perfect division between civilization and chaos. In that respect, the government must keep the majority of the population happy to prevent the chaos. Things like clean drinking water and fulfilling waste needs are big factors in society. The government must cater to the majority’s needs and to do so, it often becomes a burden on the minority’s behalf. With every issue of questioning the equality and the environmental ethics, the EPA argues that every decision made is made in the best interest of the general public and that every decision is fair. The EPA also insists that the group as a whole makes decisions surrounding “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, culture, education, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies."

     Environmental justice and environmental ethics connect with each other as the government has to make the final decision of where the burden must lie, in return for keeping the majority of the population safe and healthy, or relatively so.

Article Information:

Environmental Justice: Merging Environmental Law and Ethics. By: Rinne, Julia G., Dinkins, Carol E., Natural Resources & Environment, 08823812, Winter2011, Vol. 25, Issue 3