Ethical theories in environmental protection
Ethical theories were developed to help in distinguishing moral principles; hence, they can be used in justifying the argument that we have a moral duty to protect the environment. Protecting the environment can be either from a professional or personal view, and it is upon individuals to determine what is regarded as correct when it comes to the idea of protecting the environment. Ethical theories typically help in the procedural effort to realize moral aspects and validate moral values. Therefore, ethical egoism, utilitarianism, and Kantian ethics can be used as claims to support environmental protection. The following is an analysis of how these theories can be used in authenticating the claim of environmental protection.
Firstly, ethical egoism backs environmental protection as it advocates that moral individuals have to act with self-concern. Protecting the environment is a type of self-interest since the ultimate outcome will be beneficial to a specific individual; thus, the need for them to participate in environmental conservation. Next, utilitarianism justifies environmental preservation due to the fact that it focuses on good results. Environmental conservation is generally beneficial to all people; hence, utilitarianism justifies it as an appropriate ethical choice. For instance, there is a need for protection of marine parks as it helps in proper resource management and helps in tourism. Lastly, Kantian ethics justify the need for environmental conservation as they focus on all individuals regardless of their wants. Therefore, people have the responsibility to conserve the environment as they are the ones who live in it and therefore have to take care of it regardless of their interests.
From my standpoint, the Kantian theory is the strongest when it comes to environmental conservation, as it is the obligation of all human beings to take care of the environment. Self-interest is not considered in this case, because one person’s withdrawal would mean a more substantial adversative effect on those who are co-operative.