Can the environment be assisted by the protection offered by human rights - Dissertation Example

?Can the environment be assisted by the protection offered by Human Rights? Or has ecocentrism become extinct in the face of anthropocentrism? With the advent of the industrial age, man has been using nature and its resources to pull himself out of poverty. In this quest to develop countries governments and non state actors have not been using these resources with moderation or sensibly. Many of the present developed countries, have long list ecological damage they have done in the past to reach this position of development thus when these nations try to stop the developing nations from undertaking actions which would be detrimental to the Earth’s ecosystem, they sound hypocritical as the developing countries are simply following their footsteps. However many citizens of the developing world have joined the quest against such exploitive methods of using the worlds resources. One such citizen was Arundhati Roy , author of” god of small things”, who used her fame to direct the media’s attention towards and criticize, the Supreme Court of India’s decision to let the giant Narmada River dam to be made. This construction meant disaster for India’s largest ecological movement, but also would endanger the livelihoods of many small peasant farmers. This public defiance from Roy resulted in her being sentenced to a day in prison for contempt of court. These incidents brought about heated debates over who owns God’s gift that is natural resources on earth. More importantly who decides what the correct path to follow is. With all these fundamental questions being asked it was inevitable that basic question of Human Rights and environmental rights are asked.1 The universal declaration of human rights was presented and adopted in the United Nation General Assembly on December 10th, 1948. This charter set down fundamental components of what every member state considered basic human rights , however not one of the 30 articles in the declaration of human rights even mentioned safeguarding the environment from extensive and excessive human use. It is because of this, that many feel that it is near to impossible for human rights to bring protection of the environment in its realm and more importantly, that human rights impede environmental protection. If the basic definition of human rights is seen, then it’s a subject that is not just focused on humans but rights that arise from being human and is not concerned with anything else of nature no matter how beautiful or important position it holds in the ecosystem. The origins of the subject of human rights come from the works of Thomas Hobbes, who considered individual as an independent entity fighting to survive in a “hostile state”. Thus simply put human rights are fulfillment of an individual’s dreams and aspiration in any way possible. So by gauging from Hobbs understanding of the term human rights it can be deduced that the theory of human rights would have problems with dealing more than one human around as it is so focused on a single human and his rights. Many have argued that it has been very difficult for human rights theory itself, to combat, two very important concept, firstly individualism, which is the core of the theory and secondly, that all human should be able to live self fulfilling lives and get along with each other. To overcome this problem of narcissism and secure support for “marginalized people”, in the past human rights activist have compared the plights of such people to animals like, the aborigines in Australia or the native American, when it is said not to treat them like animals. However, this is at the expense of the animals or any non human life form and implies that it is completely alright to mistreat non human life forms. Thus, it is argued that if a theory has such difficulties in being able to allow all humans to be covered by the basic human rights that it has to take the support of mistreatment of animals to make any progress then it would definitely fail in providing non humans life forms any support if they are mistreated by humans.2 With this in mind, the paper focuses on whether human rights and environment protection can coexist The paper will also try to distinguish between ecocentric approach and anthropocentric approach. The paper has been divided using the following way. First detailed definition is given of the two approaches. Followed by a section which compares the two theories, this is followed by a section linking Human Rights to the Environment. This section is then followed by taking the case study of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and seeing how an environmental disaster infringes on human rights. The last section is the conclusion. This debate of whether Human Rights can assist environment protection has lead to the formation of two opposing philosophies. One in Ecocentrism and the other is Anthropocentrism. Ecocentrism is a term used in ecological philosophy to denote a nature-centered, as opposed to human centered, system of values. The validation used for ecocentric theory is from the ontological belief. It is this belief system which states that there is no division between human and non human living entity. Thus Ecocentrism believe that humans are only a piece of a very complicated puzzle which is the earth and its ecosystem.3 According to Stan Rowe in his article, Ecocentrism: the chord that Harmonizes Humans and Earth, states The ecocentric argument is grounded in the belief that, compared to the undoubted importance of the human part, the whole ecosphere is even more significant and consequential: more inclusive, more complex, more integrated, more creative, more beautiful, more mysterious, and older than time. The "environment" that anthropocentrism misperceives as materials designed to be used exclusively by humans, to serve the needs of humanity, is in the profoundest sense humanity's source and support: its ingenious, inventive life-giving matrix. Ecocentrism goes beyond biocentrism with its fixation on organisms, for in the ecocentric view people are inseparable from the inorganic/organic nature that encapsulates them. They are particles and waves, body and spirit, in the context of Earth's ambient energy. 4 and: To switch Western culture from its present track to a saving ecopolitical route means finding a new and compelling belief-system to redirect our way-of-living. It must be a vital outgrowth from our science-based culture. It seems to me that the only promising universal belief-system is ecocentrism, defined as a value-shift from Homo sapiens to planet earth. A scientific rationale backs the value-shift. All organisms are evolved from Earth, sustained by Earth. Thus Earth, not organism, is the metaphor for Life. Earth not humanity is the Life-center, the creativity-center. Earth is the whole of which we are subservient parts. Such a fundamental philosophy gives ecological awareness and sensitivity an enfolding, material focus. Ecocentrism is not an argument that all organisms have equivalent value. It is not an anti-human argument nor a put-down of those seeking social justice. It does not deny that myriad important homocentric problems exist. But it stands aside from these smaller, short-term issues in order to consider Ecological Reality. Reflecting on the ecological status of all organisms, it comprehends the Ecosphere as a Being that transcends in importance any one single species, even the self-named sapient one. 5 Origin of term Aldo Leopold, a notable environmentalist of the 20th century, is credited for coining the term Ecocentrism. In his book, A Sand County Almanac, he talks about how conservation of nature links with Ecocentrism; he further states, that all things in nature, animate and inanimate are intrinsically good. Leopold believes that humans should act in accordance with their environment however believes that in order to do this it is mandatory for humans to understand earth and its ecology first. In the book, Leopold uses a “biotic pyramid “as an example to explain the workings of the ecosystem. This pyramid structure allows us to see the interconnectedness of earth’s ecology. For instance the sun radiates its heat to all life forms and is vital in their existence. Moreover, in the book when Leopold discusses land ethics he changes the role of humans from sole bearers of the land, to, one of the many life forms which includes inanimate objects as well that inhabit it.6 As Leopold states, “role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land-community to plain member and citizen of it. [The land ethic] implies respect for his fellow-members…” About land use, Leopold states that it is important to scrutinize “terms of what is ethically and esthetically right, as well as what is economically expedient. A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise” thus in his book Leopold emphasizes that there should be a state of harmony between man and nature as there is interconnectedness between earths ecology and all the life forms that inhabit it. Anthropocentrism or humanocentrism is an opposing theory to Ecocentrism. It regards human beings as the most important and vital part of earth and its ecology. Thus they only look at things from the human perspective. Thus they are the proponents of the concept of human supremacy. Many environmentalists such as Dave Foreman and Christopher Manes believe that Anthropocentrism is the root cause of many environmental problems such as ecological crisis, extinction of many non human species as well few indigenous tribes. Ecocentrism and Anthropocentrism I.B. Berkson is of the belief that human ethics in the west, state that nature is there to support humans in their pursuit for better life. Since the advent of the industrial age, earth’s ecology has been under threat and the world is faced with recurring ecological crisis like the recent Gulf of Mexico oil spill to the ever shrinking size of the Amazon forest. It is because this leading environmentalist Leopold and Naess have through their writing on environmental ethics have emphasized on the intrinsic value of nature. Leopold states the importance of now switching from anthropocentrism to ecocentrism by saying "we have a well articulated human-to-human ethic; what we need is a comparable human-to-land ethic." Here Leopold when using the term land does not just mean soil rather all of earth’s ecology. Furthermore he states that human have to now give up the previous role which stated the underlying concept of human supremacy. Thus they have stop exploiting nature for their benefit at the expense of other life forms instead live as ordinary citizens of earth like other life forms. Naess another supporter of Ecocentrism, in his writing mentions “deep ecology” and is in favor of it in contrast to “shallow ecology” which only considers conserving resources and pollutant to safeguard humans. Naess argues that concern for the environment must surpass the concern created when human interests are endangered. "A new ethic, embracing plants and animals as well as people, is required for human societies to live in harmony with the natural world on which they depend for survival and well-being." Thus both Leopold and Naess believe that human beings should not take a central position in the land community instead they should understand and accept that all members of the land community including humans are of equal standing. Thus the concept of equality which is expressed in human to human moral codes is now to be applied to all of nature, which includes humans. Thus by putting intrinsic value on” natural objects and processes” will be the guiding principle in helping humanity take ecological responsible actions.7 However, J.B. Callicott, a supporter of the anthropocentric approach argues that the concept of putting intrinsic value on earth’s ecosystem is flawed as it is dependent on humans to put a value thus making humans a more important part of nature. Thus there is a conflict between the intrinsic and objective value of nature. Naess in his ecocentric arguments called for population control so that both human and non human life forms flourish. At the same time Naess has stressed upon the fundamental rights of an individual member of the earth’s ecosystem. However Naess support for population control presents a contradiction in the theory where he stresses all lives in the biosphere are equal.8 These arguments have been greatly discussed by Li, however by looking in depth at these theories one realizes the main reason for contention. In one place where it is felt that human being should all live a certain standard of living, however it can also be seen that any sort of development which help humans reach their desired goals requires the use of nature and it is this balance that humans have been trying to achieve. More importantly it has come to notice that the degradation of the environment itself leads to human rights violations. Link between human rights and the environment The world and its residents of late have been greatly affected by the decline of the ecosystem from shortage of water to rising water levels in the seas and the oceans. However a trend most noted is that the worst affected by these disasters are the people from the underdeveloped countries especially racial and ethnic minorities. Thus many fundamental human rights are in danger such as the right to health or the right to property and culture. With the direct relationship between environmental degradation and the infringement of human rights, the concerned world organizations started to draft policies to combat this problem. The United Nation in 1945 issued the basic human right charter,however it was the Stockholm declaration which is the charter “rights based approach to environmental protection” was introduced. Thus in 1972 at the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment it was affirmed that "man's environment, the natural and the man-made, are essential to his well-being and to the enjoyment of basic human rights--even the right to life itself."9 And also that “ Man have the fundamental right to freedom, equality and adequate conditions of life, in an environment of a quality that permits a life of dignity and well-being, and he bears a solemn responsibility to protect and improve the environment for present and future generations.” 10 Despite the fact that human rights and environmental right started at different points however it is becoming increasingly clear that they are interlinked. For instance, right to life requires the environment to be non hazardous to health. An important feat was also achieved in the Stockholm declaration, where it was declared that it is mandatory for governments and all concerned parties to inform the public of any harmful environmental effect before taking on any business or other activity. More importantly it was also declared that information sharing especially with regards to environment protection or disaster management is mandatory. However it is incumbent on the party receiving the information to use it only for the purpose it was provided and any breach of this rule would result in compensation payment to wronged party. Human Rights and the Environment The human rights listed below are affected by environmental harm. Here we will be looking at the case study of Gulf of Mexico oil spill which occurred because of the explosion of the deep water rig killing its 11 crew members on 10th April 2010. Right to Life There is a strong link between right to life and the environment. For instance environmental disaster causes loss of life. For instance, the loss of life of the 11 crew member due to the explosion. Right to Health This is interlinked with the right to life. In the above example of the oil spill , the health of the cleanup crew and residents, who ate the tainted fish from the spillage site have been known to get sick. Right to Water Though it is not specifically mentioned in the international treaty however it falls directly under human rights. Oil spill cause the water deposited in the oceans to become polluted. Right to Food Due to the environmental disturbance, the right to physical and economic access to adequate food, is progressively under pressure. Due to the oil spill it was seen that marine life especially fish were contaminated and no longer available for eating for the public Right to Property With the oil spill numerous island and property on it were contaminated causing the owners to lose the lands economic value. Right to Shelter and Housing When environmental degradation causes people to live in hazardous conditions. During the oil spill the aftereffect was that people residing in the nearby fishing community were forced to live in conditions which are harmful for individual to live in. Right to Information and Right to Participate With the Stockholm Declaration it is incumbent on the people to be informed of the environmental disaster and its effects. However it is argued during this disaster though information to the public was give hover not to the extent it should have been. Right to Work The oil spill cause major job loss and fall in income as it caused the fisherman to lose their livelihood as no one would be willing to buy contaminated fish products.More important the area also witnessed major fall in tourism as the beautiful oceanic view was destroyed which again caused a fall in income. Right to Culture, Family life and Rights of Indigenous People The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, for the first time recognizes the conservation and protection of the environment and resources as a human right. This oil spill causes a lot of damage to the inhabitants of the islands. 11 Instances where humans have endangered the nature The governments of the world have to feed more than 6 billion of its citizens and to do so they use different natural resources available to them. However these governments main aim is not just to feed their people but also give them opportunities of better standard of living. So this has led to explorations around the world for new resources to use such as oil, iron and others. In the past many countries were forced to limit their exploitative ways because of lack of funding however now due to foreign direct investments by multinationals the problem has been overcome. In the mining sector the world saw a dramatic increase in investment figure to $8 billion in developing countries. The extraction process is hazardous to the ecosystem of the surrounding area. For instance in oil exploration and extraction numerous toxic pollutants are released also the esthetic beauty of the area is affected with not just the oil rig but also the huge pipelines which are set up to transfer the oil for the rig to the cleaning plant. Oil exploration in Ecuador tropical forest has had not just detrimental effect on nature but also the indigenous people of the Oriente. Traditionally the tribe of this area use to live on slash and burn cultivation practice, however with oil exploration starting in the area and with government pressure these tribes were forced to leave their traditional lifestyle. Another example of how the change in climate due to environmental degradation has caused changes in the lifestyle of people around the world. Tulun and Takuu , the two island off the coast of Papua New Guinea , are close to be covered by the Pacific Ocean water. The rising sea level has caused the people of the two islands to evacuate to safety. Now the people of these islands fear that they will lose their distinct culture. The world is also facing the risk of global warming which is putting the livelihoods of many fishermen at risk.12 Causes of Mani- Locations Effect of Ecological Consequences for Conflict festations Globalisation Consequences Subsistence Rights Extraction of Mining, oil, Rainforest, Easier cross-border Loss of Displacement from raw materials deforestation, mountaino investment, but also biodiversity, living space, loss of overfishing us areas, more efficient redund- poisoning of soil livelihood, pollution coastal ancyprocedures, and and water of living space areas pressure to export because of debt Alteration of Plantations, Farmland, Easier foreign invest- Monoculture, Displacement from ecosystems dams, prawn river ment in agriculture & pesticides, loss of living space, loss of farms valleys, agribusiness; produc- biodiversity, livelihood coastal tion of animal food and increased water areas luxury goods for North consumption Reprogram- Hybrid Mono- Enforcement of Water Loss of free access to ming of nature plants, culture worldwide patent consumption, cultivated plants and genetic rights via TRIPS loss of species animals, dependence seeds, on money and optimized corporations, livestock concentration in agricultural sector Destabili- Changes in Arid and Rising CO2 emissions Decreased Displacement, zation due to sea level, semi-arid due to growth, but also fertility, diseases, diseases, loss of climate precipitation, regions; spread of CO2-efficient species loss, livelihood and change temperature low-lying technologies floods income coastal areas Pollution of Harmful Urban Urbanization through Poisoning of Diseases, especially urban living chemicals in slums growth; competition environment among women and space drinking among cities for children water, air and investment; greater soil, weight of elites and unregulated lesser weight of social wastewater policies Changing Falling Small-scale Easier agricultural Species loss Decline of small prices of producer agriculture, exports to South; farmers, less food natural prices; rising urban privatization of security, dis- resources consumer slums services, water and connection of water prices electricity 13 These are only few examples of how development for better livelihood which is a basic human right has caused harm to the environment. It is because of this it is necessary for the governments to step in and make environmentally friendly development policies. Such policies will allow individuals to not live in dignity but also not encroach on any ones else’s right. Moreover international bodies have made rights which now take in to account environment and Human Rights. A good example of this can be seen below. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Article 1: (1) All peoples have the right to self-determination, by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. (2) All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources… In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence. Article 11: (1) The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realization of this right, recognizing to this effect the essential importance of international cooperation based on free consent. 14 These laws allow not only Human Rights to be protected but more importantly protecting environment is also a fundamental part of the law. Conclusion It can be seen that though the world in the past has greatly operated on the principle of anthropocentrism it has become increasingly important now to turn toward Ecocentrism. The main reason for this is that human beings of late have realized that the world’s natural resources are not infinite. Thus in order for them to be able to use these resources in the future too it is necessary for them not to exploit the resources rather use them in moderation. More over before taken any activity it is important that state and non state actors conduct a cost benefit analysis not just with themselves in perspective rather the whole community. It is also important for the developed countries to understand that if an underdeveloped country is willing to take environmentally friendly actions at the cost of its own countries development than it is necessary for them to provide the underdeveloped countries some sort of compensation. Moreover it is also necessary that further in roads should be made in rule and laws for environment protection. Additionally, it can be clearly stated that Human Rights after the Stockholm Declaration can assist environment protection. This is because by endangering the environment we violate Human Rights laws like Right to Health. However, though the support of environmentally friendly policies is strong a lack of action is seen on the front such many countries not support Kyoto Protocol. The main reason that is seen behind this government still feel that such policies would slow down their countries growth despite seen numerous real life examples of how polluted environment not only destroys the environment but in the long run slow growth. Bibliography 1. "ANTHROPOCENTRISM." Web. 3 May 2011. . 2. "Business & Human Rights : Human Rights Impacts of Oil Pollution: US Gulf Coast." Business & Human Rights : Home. Web. 04 May 2011. . 3. Coomans, Fons. "The Ogoni Case before the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights." Centre for Human Rights, Maastricht University. Web. 3 May 2011. . 4. "Ecocentric, Anthropocentric, Biocentric." Internship in Environmental Ethics. 8 Feb. 2009. Web. 04 May 2011. . 5. "Ecocentrism." Web. 3 May 2011. . 6. "Environmental Rights Are Human Rights — Friends of the Earth International." Foei Home Page — Friends of the Earth International. Friends of Earth International. Web. 01 May 2011. . 7. Gearty, Conor. "Do Human Rights Help or Hinder Environmental Protection?" Journal of Human Rights and the Environment, Mar. 2010. Web. 1 May 2011. . 8. Huey-li Li – “On the Nature of Environmental Education (Anthropocentrism versus Non-Anthropocentrism: The Irrelevant Debate)." College of Education at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 1996. Web. 04 May 2011. . 9. "Human Rights and the Environment." OHCHR Homepage. United Nation. Web. 04 May 2011. . 10. Ingwe, Richard, Joseph C. Ebegbulem, and C.C.C. Ikeji. "Ecocentric and Anthropocentric Policies and Crises in Climate/environment, Finance and Economy: Implications of the Emerging Green Policy of the Obama Administration for Africa’s Sustainable Development." African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, 6 Oct. 2006. Web. 3 May 2011. . 11. KORTENKAMP, KATHERINE V., and COLLEEN F. MOORE. "ECOCENTRISM AND ANTHROPOCENTRISM: MORAL REASONING ABOUT ECOLOGICAL COMMONS DILEMMAS." University of Wisconsin -Madison. Journal of Environmental Psychology. Web. 2 May 2011. . 12. Metha,Gita: A River Sutra, New Dehli :Viking, 1993 13. Picolotti, Romina, and Jorge D. Taillant. "Linking Human Rights and the Environment." Web. 1 May 2011. 14. “Right To Environment - Environment and Rights." Right To Environment - Right To Environment. Web. 04 May 2011. . 15. Rowe, Stan J. "Ecocentrism: The Chord That Harmonizes Humans and Earth." Ecospherics Ethics. 1994. Web. 2 May 2011. . 16. Rowe, Stan J. "Ecocentrism and Traditional Ecological Knowledge." Ecocentrism. . Web. 1 May 2011. Read More