Syllabus: Philosophy of the Environment (Phil 2281.10)Professor: Michele Friend
Philosophy of the Environment (PHIL 2281.10)
Spring 2014, WF 2:20 – 3:35.
Prof. Michèle Friend
Office: Rome 453
Office and office hours: Rome 453 Fridays 1:00 – 2:00, or by appointment. I shan’t have office hours on the following Fridays due to department meetings: 21 Feb., 28 March. It’s possible, I shan’t be in for the Fridays in January or the first Friday of February because of job candidate interviews.
Office telephone: (202) 994-5002. I do not check the voice mail.
e-mail: ;
Prerequisites
There are no prerequisites for this course. However, the course will be demanding on your time. (Note that there is s special outing on the 31st. Jan. This will be from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., this counts for 2 classroom periods.)It will also require some intellectual sophistication to do well, as well as good writing skills.
Grades
Assignment 1: 30%
Test 20%
Assignment 2: 20%
Final Examination: 30%.
Attendance: 2 absences allowed. On the 3rd absence 1% is deducted, on the 4th another 1% and so on, regardless of the reason. Missing the whole of the “discussion/ workshop” on the 31st Jan. counts for 2 absences. Missing part counts for 1.
There is no possibility to ‘make up marks’.
Texts
Jackson: Prosperity Without Growth:Economics for a Finite Planet
Daly and Townsend: Valuing the Earth
Hopkins: The Transition Handbook
Gibson et. al. Household Sustainability
Quinn: Ishmael
A course pack of some readings will also be handed out in class.
Content of the Course
There will be three parts to the course, each corresponding to both a “fix” for the environmental problems we face, and, more subtly, a conception of sustainability.
The first part is the technological fix. The idea is that, through our development of technology and science, we shall soon, or already have, the means to live “sustainably”. Here “sustainability” means roughly: without compromising our material wealth, energy consumption, economic system or cultural values, sustaining steady growth of the economy of all countries etc. We shall be critical of: the assumptions behind the idea of the technological fix, reasons for optimism, reasons for pessimism and of the accompanying conception of sustainability. Note that if we are sustaining something (a practice, an attitude, a life-style; we are (implicitly) giving up something else. In the case of the technological fix we would be giving up our present state of technology and, given population growth, a lot of the wild natural environment.
We’ll be attending a discussion/ workshop accompanying the exhibition “the Post-Oil City” on the 31st Jan. (10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.). The exhibition is at the University of the District of Columbia. You are encouraged to see the exhibition itself in your free time.
The second part of the course concerns the cultural and spiritual “fix”. In contrast to the first part of the course, we presuppose that we cannot sustain our (middle-class American) current life-style, or at least, we cannot share it with many other people (and that this is unjust), or if developing countries aspire to the same living conditions, then ours must be compromised. Here we look at a call, often made by others than “us”, to re-assess our values and our relationship to nature. The idea is to change our values and life-style in order to sustain the environment – thus enabling more equitable distribution of natural resources inter and intra-generationally. We shall look at the call of first peoples of the Americas. We shall also look at an artists’ attempt to make “us” aware of our destruction of the biosphere and over-consumption of natural resources. This cultural and spiritual fix corresponds to the idea that “we” cannot continue to live as we do, but we can decrease our material and energy consumption by re-orienting our values and changing some aspects of our culture and habits.What we want then to “sustain” are the better, or more important, aspects of our culture, and the assumption is that we cannot do this without changing our relationship to the environment. I am arranging for someone to come to talk to the class about the native people’s attitudes towards the environment and their concerns.
The technological and the cultural fix can then be compared to each other.The cultural fix is internal to individuals and to culture. The technological fix is external and depends on scientific and technological innovation. The two “fixes” do not preclude each other. We can do a bit of both, but they do ask us to give up different things. The difference is one of emphasis and our conception of sustainability and what we value in our culture, and who and what we value outside our culture. The underlying assumption of the cultural fix, is that “we” over-consume, and that we can diminish our consumption through changes in habits and thus, through a change in culture. Moreover, we can bring people in developing economies to share our more spiritually or culturally enlightened values, so they would by-pass the “developing” phase we went through of gross over-consumption.We can learn some more enlightened values and habits from people from other cultures, such as the First Peoples.
These ideas invite a very important question: over consumption of what? One very powerful metaphor (!) of consumption is the one used in the prevailing economic theory. It is unlikely that (enough) individuals will make a substantial change in their habits or culture without some economic incentive. But the economic incentives should not be piecemeal, opportunistic, blind or haphazard, since they would then risk making things worse, or not making enough of a change in the better direction.
The third part of the course will focus on the economic fix. We contrast neoclassical economic theory (which is what is best known in our society today) to ecological economics. Neoclassical economic thinking is dominant nationally and internationally. It is the theory used by the World Bank, the IMF, the OECD etc. It is the theory presupposed in the writings of the Economist. It is within neoclassical economic theory that most government decisions take place (with a few exceptions such as the governments of some South American countries, Bhutan, North Korea, some smaller governing bodies of communities, etc.).
In contrast to pure neo-classical economics, we have: classical economists (such as Adam Smith), environmental economists (Sen, Stiglitz) and ecological economists (Georgescu-Roegen, Daly). We shall look a little at classical economic theory, but more importantly at environmental and ecological economics.
Environmental economics is more prevalent in the USA than ecological economics, and is closer to neo-classical economics. Environmental economists are concerned about the environment, and are skeptical that market forces alone will fix the problem of our impact on the environment. They work on ways to put a monetary, market-based, value on environmental goods and services to explain to people who sit in the pure neo-classical paradigm that we should value the environment. In this way they comfort neoclassical economic thinking. Briefly: they want us to take into account the environmentally important “externalities” (of the neoclassical economic system) (see the TEEB report).The underlying assumption of sustainability accompanying environmental economics is that we want to maintain a natural resource base rich enough, and stable enough, that future generations can exploit it at the same rate as we do (Bruntland report), but that this can only be facilitated by technological innovation, global economic growth and internalizing the “externalities” through economic policy. Moreover, it is less costly to do this now, than later (see the Stern Review).
Ecological economists are more radical, and part company with neoclassical economics on several fronts: they disagree on conceptions of: rationality, substitutability of goods for one another, monetary valuations for environmental goods and services, information and transaction costs, time, and on indicators of wealth or well-being. They re-insert ethics and cultural values into their economic modeling directly. Moreover, they encompass the financial economy within the context of the environment. A key feature of this context is that the physical and biological environment arephysical and biological entropic systems (overall degrading and leading to increasing chaos (with local pockets of negative entropy)). It follows that the conception of sustainability accompanying the ecological economist’s line of thinking is that we are depleting natural resources and increasing the rate of entropy on our planet through our technology and culture of transportation and consumption of material goods. Thus, there is nothing to “sustain”. Instead, we are to decide on a culturally acceptable rate of entropy for our planet or for our community. And this is a cultural choice meted out in the political arena, with political and moral consequences. In the course we shall be introduced to the above concepts; especially, we shall ask if there is an economic fix, and if so, what it is. We shall spend more time on the economic fix than on the other fixes, since the topic is more complicated, and is less appreciated or known in the USA.
At the end of the day, our impact on the environment will be most effectively lessened if we tackle the problem on all fronts: technological/ scientific, cultural and economic; and at all levels of society: individual, community, national and international. It will be more thoroughgoing if we re-align our economic thinking, and then re-aling our technological innovations and culture to suit. The class will be exposed to a very radical way of thinking: that of ecological economics, which is rarely taught in the USA.
Assignments, tests and examinations
Assignment 1 (30%): You will be given a metric by which to calculate some aspects of your “ecological footprint” (this is much more encompassing that your carbon footprint). You are to successively monitor your footprint (add more aspects each day), over the period of five days. Spend the next two days making a “full” recording. You will then be asked to reduce your footprint for the following week. After this, you will make a video or oral recording in groups. The assignment takes two weeks plus one meeting time on another day for the recording.
You will be graded on accuracy, and depending what your “base-line” is, on the reduction of your footprint. Work with the Hopkins and Gibson books to look for ideas and inspiration for reducing your footprint. At the end of the assignment you will present a footprint diary (20%). You will also be asked to work with other students to make a short video of your experience guided by some questions. This is worth (10%). The assignment is worth 30% of your final grade.The first assignment is due 12 Feb. More details about the assignment are supplied at the end of the syllabus. Start on this as early as possible, so that you have a bit of slack if a problem/ interruption occurs.
Test (20%): you will have a mid-term test based on the material read for class, and discussed in class.
Assignment 2 (20%):Using the chapters in the Gibson book as a template you are to select a habit, custom or ritual (henceforth: habit) which you do regularly, or which interests you. Avoid those that have been discussed in the Gibson book. Answer the following questions (when applicable): Introduction: What have you chosen? How prevalent is it, and where and when is it prevalent? Why is it followed/ who follows it? Has anything been done about it culturally/ politically (such as a policy)? Are there groups of people (possibly from the past) who do not have this habit? What do they do instead/ what is their alternative attitude? What are the time-frames/ impact involved in the habit? You should be using sources and citing some statistics. What is your attitude towards this habit? Sustainability: How does this habit affect “sustainability”? Define “sustainability” to answer this question. Look at the water, carbon and ecological footprint of the habit, and if you find another important measure of environmental impact, include this too. Also find out the monetary cost. Separate out issues of volume of waste, pollution, sequestration, the ability of the environment to absorb the waste. Is some important part of culture sustained? Is knowledge sustained or passed on through this habit? How do we measure the above? Critique: Under different definitions of “sustainability” would we have different answers as to the sustainability of the habit? Are the measures of sustainability available? Are they adequate? Are they easy, or would they be easy, to improve? What would it take? Are there other measures that are important with respect to the environment that have been missed out? Can they be supplied? How? Does the monetary cost of the habit reflect, or compensate for the impact on the environment of the habit? If there is a discrepancy, how do we find out what the “real” cost should be? Refer, here to both the sorts of valuations made by environmental economists and ecological economists – they are quite different. Conclusion: What can we do and what should we do? Are we (or who is/ will be) changing the habit? Is it easy or feasible to ask for change? What would it take? What would Quinn’s gorilla have us learn about the habit?
Note: not all the questions will be applicable to your choice. Furthermore, in philosophy it is always permitted to question the question. Therefore, do not hesitate to critique the questions themselves and offer better formulations, or ask others of your own.
Final Examination (30%): The final examination will be to test your understanding and assimilation of the reading material since the mid-term test.
Schedule
This is a rough schedule. If the university is closed, then the order of the lectures will stay, only the date will change. The lost time will be made up on the make-up day. In lectures, I will speak to some of the readings for that class, but not all. You are responsible for the readings not discussed in class. The test and the final examination will pick up on: class lectures, discussions and on readings assigned but not covered in class.
15 Jan. Introduction, Syllabus, Setting of first assignment.
HW: Read: Hopkins, chapters 1, 2, Gibson et. al., Chs. 2, 3, 4., Quinn ch. 1.
17 Jan.The technological fix: Climate Change and Peak Oil, less oil and greater efficiency.
HW: sources of energy: wind, sun, geo-thermal, waves. Read Hopkins chapters 3, 4.Go to Read up the entries for wind, sun, geo-thermal power and waves. Pay close attention to the list of advantages and disadvantages. Look up other web sites to check for other advantages or disadvantages. What is important but omitted from the web site assigned above? Read: Shrivastava fromMcIntyre et. al. (Course pack item 1).Quinnch.2., Gibson chs. 5, 6, 7.
22 Jan.The technological fix: sources of energy: carbon fuels and bio-fuels.
HW. Go to Read up the entries for bio-fuels. Again, do a little independent research to discover other disadvantages not mentioned on the web site. Read course pack item 2. Quinn Ch. 3. Gibson chs.8, 9, 10.Course pack item 2.
24 Jan.The technological fix: Technology and Efficiency. Sustainability, resilience and our impact on the environment – analysed in terms of non-renewable resources, renewable resources and free resources (where non-renewable, renewable and free refer to physical energy). What are the indicators that technology is decreasing our impact on the environment?
HW. Read Hopkins: chapters 3, 4, Quinn, ch. 4, Gibson chs. 11, 12, 13, course pack items 3, 4.
29 Jan.The technological fix: First look at the Jevons Paradox. What are the indicators that technology is increasing our impact on the environment? What is a measure of entropy? What would it mean for a technology to be less productive in entropy?
HW. Read Quinn, ch.5, Gibson chs. 14, 15, 16.Course pack item 5.
31 Jan. Outing.In lieu of class, you are to attend the workshop on the “Post Oil City” run by UDC and sponsored by the Goethe Institute. 10:00 – 1:00. Please note that this is neither your regular class time, nor does it take up only one class time. Please do what it takes to absent yourself from other classes to attend this event. One class close to spring break will be cancelled in order to compensate for the added time. See Blackboard “announcements” for the link to the poster for the workshop and exhibition, and for further details.
5 Feb. The cultural fix: Considering climate change, peak oil and entropy; it seems that faith in the technological fix alone is unwise. Hence, we should look at the cultural fix too.
HW. Course pack items 6, 7.
7 Feb. The cultural fix: Art, Science, Fact, Emotion.
HW. Visit Look at the images carefully, in the order listed. Read the blurb about the different photographic projects. Come to class ready to discuss the merits and shortcomings of art being used to communicate environmental values. Questions for video for first assignment made available after class on blackboard.
12 Feb. The cultural fix: Alternative Values: First Peoples of the North Americas.