Categorical Imperative in Defense of Strong Sustainability

Pankojini Mulia


Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad-826004 (India)

Ajit Kumar Behura


Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad-826004 (India)

Sarita Kar


Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad-826004 (India)


Abstract

Strong sustainability defends that certain forms of natural capital (environment) are critical and therefore, non-substitutable. There is an increasing concern for conserving the natural environment due to its unique contribution for sustenance and wellbeing of all living beings. The development process which does not preserve its natural capital is bound to lead towards an unsustainable growth path. In the wake of strong sustainability, it is an imperative to preserve the natural environment as it is degrading beyond its threshold limit. The ethical aspect of strong sustainability raises the ethical question what is right thing to do and emphasizes on ethical relations of humans with natural environment.  The paper defends strong sustainability from Kant’s Categorical Imperative. Categorical Imperative motivates every human to act out of duty. Actions done for the sake of duty alone are morally worthy. A duty is the relationship between one’s moral action and his autonomy of the will. Concerning the sustenance and wellbeing of the present and the future generation, it is the moral duty of the humans to preserve the natural environment. 


Keywords:

strong sustainability, weak sustainability, natural capital, categorical imperatives, direct and indirect duty

ADAMS W. M., 2006, The Future of Sustainability: Re-thinking Environment and Development in the Twenty-first Century, in: The IUCN Renowned Thinkers Meetings, p. 29-31.
  Google Scholar

BECKERMAN W., 1995, How Would You Like your Sustainability Sir? Weak or Strong? A reply to my Critics, in: Environmental Values, vol. 4, p. 169-179.
  Google Scholar

BRAND F., 2009, Critical Natural Capital Revisited: Ecological Resilience and Sustainable Development, in: Ecological Economic, vol. 68, p. 605-612.
  Google Scholar

DALY H.E., 2005, Economics in Full World, in: Scientific American, vol. 3, p. 100-107.
  Google Scholar

DEAN R., 2006, The Value of Humanity in Kant’s Moral Theory, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
  Google Scholar

DIETZ S., NEUMAYER E., 2007, Weak and Strong Sustainability in the SEEA: Concepts and Measurement, in: Ecological Economics, vol. 61, p. 617-626.
  Google Scholar

EKINS P., 2011, Environmental Sustainability: From Environmental Valuation to the Sustainability Gap, Progress in: Physical Geography, vol. 35, no 5, p. 629-651.
  Google Scholar

EKINS P., SIMON S., DEUTSCH L., FOLKE C., DE GROOT R., 2003, A Framework for the Practical Application of the Concepts Critical Natural Capital and Strong Sustainability, in: Ecological Economics, vol. 44, p. 165-185.
  Google Scholar

ELKINGTON J., 1997, Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Lines of 21st Century Business, Capstone Publishing, Oxford.
  Google Scholar

GILLROY M. J., 1998, Kant’s Conservationism’ in his paper ‘Kantian Ethics and Environmental Policy Argument: Autonomy, Ecosystem Integrity, and our Duties to Nature, in: Ethics and Environment, vol. 3, no 2, p.131-155
  Google Scholar

HARTMAN L.P., CHATTERJEE A., 2007, Perspectives on Business Ethics, Tata McGraw Hill Education Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.
  Google Scholar

HARTWICK J.M., 1977, Intergenerational Equity and the Investing of Rents from Exhaustible Resources, in: The American Economic Review, vol. 67, no 5, p. 972-974.
  Google Scholar

HEDIGER W., 1999, Reconciling Weak and Strong Sustainability, in: International Journal of Social Economics, vol. 26 no 7/8/9, p. 1120-1144.
  Google Scholar

JAMIESON D., 1998, Sustainability and beyond, in: Ecological Economics, vol. 24, p. 183-192.
  Google Scholar

JAIN P., JAIN P., 2013, Sustainability Assessment Index: A Strong Sustainability Approach to Measure Sustainable Human Development, in: International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, vol. 20, no 2, p. 116-122.
  Google Scholar

JICKLING B., SAUVE L., BRIERE L., NIBLETT B., ROOT E., 2009, The 5th World Environmental Education Congress, 2009: A Research Project, in: Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 15, p. 47-67.
  Google Scholar

KANT I., 1785, Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, (ed. & trans. Gregor M. J.) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1996.
  Google Scholar

KANT I., 1788, Critique of Practical Reason, (ed. & trans. Gregor M. J.) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1996.
  Google Scholar

KANT I., 1797, The Metaphysics of Morals, (ed. & trans. Gregor M. J.) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1996.
  Google Scholar

MATVICYCHUK A., 2014, Ecological Deontology in the Context of Solving the Task of Ecologization of Modern Man Thinking, in: Problemy Ekorozwoju/ Problems of Sustainable Development, vol. 9, no 1, p. 151-156.
  Google Scholar

MEDHURST J., EKINS P., 2006, The European Structural Funds and Sustainable Development: A Methodology and Indicator Framework for Evaluation, in: Evaluation, vol. 12, no 4, p. 474-495.
  Google Scholar

NEUMAYER E., 2012, Human Development and Sustainability, in: Journal of Human Development Capabilities, vol. 13, no 4, p. 561-579.
  Google Scholar

PEET J., Strong Sustainability for New Zealand: Principles and Scenario, SANZ (Phase-2) Report, Nakedize Ltd., New Zealand 2009.
  Google Scholar

PELENC J., BALLET J., 2015, Strong Sustainability, Critical Natural Capital and the Capability Approach, in: Ecological Economics, vol. 112, p. 36-44.
  Google Scholar

SOLOW R.M., 1974, Intergenerational equity and exhaustible resources, in: Review of economic studies: symposium of the economics of exhaustible resources, p. 29-46.
  Google Scholar

STOCKHOLM CONFERENCE, 1972, Declaration of United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, Sweden, Stockholm.
  Google Scholar

TRUEMAN H.S., 1951, Annual Message to the Congress: the President’s Economic Report, The American Presidency Project, Online by G. Peters & J.T.Woolley, http://www.presidency. ucsb.edu (11.09.2015).
  Google Scholar

UNCED, 1992, Agenda 21, Conches, UNCED Secretariat, Switzerland, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf (27.11.2015).
  Google Scholar

Download


Published
2016-07-01

Cited by

Mulia, P., Behura, A. K., & Kar, S. (2016). Categorical Imperative in Defense of Strong Sustainability. Problemy Ekorozwoju, 11(2), 29–36. Retrieved from https://ph.pollub.pl/index.php/preko/article/view/4940

Authors

Pankojini Mulia 

Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad-826004 India

Authors

Ajit Kumar Behura 

Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad-826004 India

Authors

Sarita Kar 

Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad-826004 India

Statistics

Abstract views: 18
PDF downloads: 7