Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics EJAIB

More documents

Recommendations

Info

10Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 18 (January 2008)births were both types of population growth, and even inaffluent countries with low birth rates, the energy that wasinvested in bringing up a child was enormous. As a medicaldoctor, he saw old people in hospitals, and the amount ofenergy that was needed to keep them surviving was alsoenormous. While he was not suggesting terminating theirlives, he argued that these were problems we had notaddressed in our quest to live longer, healthier lives.Dr Md. Fakrul Islam from Bangladesh spoke on the‘Trend of using fossil fuel for irrigation purposes: A case studyof the Teesta Barrage Target Area, Bangladesh’. Megairrigation projects in Bangladesh and India drew on ancientwater cycles between the Himalayas and the Bay of Bengal.Water flow had been decreasing in recent years, however,and farmers were increasingly relying on diesel-poweredwells to extract groundwater to irrigate their crops. As a result,the use of imported fossil fuels in Bangladeshi agriculture wasincreasing, and as global prices for these commodities rosemany farmers were at risk of poverty. Dr Islam raisedconcerns about the impacts of extracting groundwater on alarge scale when health, hygiene, income and employmentlevels did not appear to be improved. He suggested thatregional cooperation, for example, bilateral treaties betweenIndia and Bangladesh, was needed to secure water andenergy sources, and to protect the environment.In discussion, Dr Nguyen Hoang Tri suggested thatsimilar problems could be found in the Mekong Delta also,and what happened in Bangladesh to avert flooding wherethere were no barrages. Dr Islam said that embankmentscould be built to protect river banks, although it wasexpensive. Constructing reservoirs was another option,although the area he had been discussing was unsuitable forthis as it was flat. Dr Abhik Gupta made the comment thatmodern international flood management was going againstbuilding embankments, and they had proved ineffective inAssam. He suggested that the reality was that these areaswere flood-prone, and that rather than flood control, weneeded to think about flood management to reduce thehuman misery caused by flooding. Dr Islam explained thathis preferred solution was not flood control, but an economicsolution that optimized water sharing between India andBangladesh.As the last speaker for the conference, Dr Ir. Khin Ni NiThein from Myanmar spoke on ‘Sustainable hydropower andengineering ethics: A quest for a two in one solution’, drawingon her previous advisory position to the World Commission onDams and her current position as Vice President forDevelopment and Resources at the Asian Institute ofTechnology (AIT). She said there were enormous ethicalissues linked to water resources. The world’s richest peopleconsumed the most, while a billion poor people still had noready access to drinking water; they often have to buy theirwater from vendors at a price which is 10 to 20 times higherthan water sold through the regular distribution network.Dams raised a particular set of issues. Whereas in the past,debate had focused on whether dams should be built at all,dams were gradually being recognised as being aboutdevelopment strategies and choices, and the focus hadshifted to how to build sustainable dams. AIT was currentlyconducting research and providing education on sustainablehydropower that included engineering ethics and corporatesocial responsibility. Five sustainability measures wereproposed: technical, economical, societal, ethical, andenvironmental.Dr Tavivat Puntarigvivat asked about how we might goabout achieving more equality in access to water. Dr Theinreplied that there were many actors working for waterequality, including the United Nations, NGOs, CSOs andglobal water partnerships which went into regions and formedwater user groups so that people could manage their ownwater. It was an uphill battle, however, because a growingnumber of companies selling water believed that water was acommodity to be bought and sold for profit, whereas shebelieved water was a human right. Dr Alastair Gunn asked aquestion about teaching engineering ethics and how it couldbe incorporated into degree structures. Dr Thein said that shecould only speak for the Asian Institute of Technology, andthat they were integrating ethical issues into course materials,for example, their course on sustainable hydropower. Ideallythey would like to develop a specialist unit on engineeringethics that could be offered as an elective. At the moment,however, they were offering guest lecturers and seminars tostudents in engineering and other courses on campus, suchas gender studies, management, and environmentalresources.The remainder of the day was spent in working groupmeetings on subtopics to develop activity plans in parallelgroups, interspersed with plenary sessions for generalfeedback.Working group reportsThe working group report on Interregionalphilosophical dialogue and ecocentric world views,environmental rights and timeframes was presented by therapporteur, Prof Alastair Gunn. They raised some preliminaryquestions including: should the term be intercultural ratherthan interregional? This was because regions are simplygeographical groupings, whereas dialogues between differentcultures are both meaningful and urgently needed. Culturesshape values in a way that regions don’t. However, theimportant thing is for people to seek common ground thoughdialogue. The group described the United Nations’ ideologyas universalistic. But genuine dialogue between people fromdifferent cultures, with different worldviews and different (orno) religions implies a pluralistic position with respect fordifferent ethical positions as genuine alternatives.The group then discussed universalism andmulticulturalism, and why UNESCO needed to change itsorientation if it is to achieve the goals implied in the topic. Thistopic is fundamentally about values. There are many views onthe source of values, such as religion, authority, reason orintuition. The group took the view that the values that peopleactually hold and live by are best seen as a product of culture.What are claimed in UN documents to be universalvalues are often a historical derivation from theAbrahamic/Christian tradition through the EuropeanEnlightenment and Modernism, which seem to have beenadopted without argument. According to one group member,they have even formed the basis for documents such as theIndian Constitution, which has few roots in the philosophy thathas been the basis of Indian society for thousands of years,for example.A universalistic approach ignores people’s attachment totheir cultures. The group thought that ordinary people did notthink in such terms. The UN could be said to have helped topave the way for globalization by encouraging the view thatethics is concerned with universal values. Globalizing forcesoften dwarf and squeeze out local values.Nation states are not necessarily representatives of anysets of values because many are not directly represented.Typically, even in participatory democracies, policies thatstates will advance in the UN are not the subject of dialogue.The example of Indian philosophy was taken as aworldview. Indian philosophy was an example of a source ofecocentric values, whereas UN values focus on individualrights which are not a good basis for ecocentrism.Philosophical traditions are the basis of ways of life in Asia.The texts of the Vedas and Upanishads are the basis ofHinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism. Karma is animportant principle which could be described as universalorder based on law of cause of effect (Newton’s SecondLaw). It reminds us that our environmental behaviour willreturn to haunt us. Another relevant principle is Dharma,which is duty and righteousness. Nature is sacred, for
Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 18 (January 2008) 11instance, forests are a place for meditation at the end of life.Forests and rivers provide for us so we should protect them.There is an emphasis on balance and harmony;recognizing that humans are not superior to the rest of nature.We have a right to utilize and enjoy nature and a duty toprotect it as a whole. Specific beliefs, such as the value offorests as a place to meditate and develop to a higher stage,are found. Traditionally, practices such as seeking permissionfrom the tree spirit to cut a tree show respect for nature.There should be minimal interference with nature (forexample, Sikhs don’t cut their hair). The viewpoint is notanthropocentric, as humans are just one of millions ofspecies. We might call it ecocentric or cosmocentric or even‘cosmo-theo-andric’, meaning World-God-Human. There is nodistinction between ‘personal’ and other areas of life since thesame values apply in all.The group felt that there were, however, limitations toancient traditions. They had developed in times when therewere no problems of pollution, resource depletion, orbiodiversity loss. There was limited scientific knowledge. Forexample, neither Jesus, the Buddha, nor Mohammed knewabout the ozone layer. There was little need to worry aboutfuture generations having somewhere to live. However,followers try to interpret the traditions in a modern context.To what extent can cultural values survive the assault ofWestern capitalist values? The group discussed the exampleof Vietnam, which had a Buddhist ecocentrist tradition. Underthe influence of capitalism, overexploitation of resources,pollution and destruction of nature appeared to be morecommon, though it was a matter for research. Developedcountries largely responsible for problems such as climatechange, and we cannot tell poor people to conserve whenthey’re hungry. Nonetheless, everyone has environmentalresponsibilities.The group debated the extent to which ‘ordinary people’still understand and appreciate the philosophical basis of theirculture. It was the responsibility of philosophers to keep thesevalues alive, by relating them to people’s traditional lifestylesin the people’s language.We need to understand the roots of the problem, whetherit be in capitalism, the Western tradition or other monotheist‘religions of the book’ such as Judaism, Christianity, andIslam. While these are not necessarily inherentlyanthropocentric they have typically been interpreted inanthropocentric way as providing God-given dominance overthe natural world. Religions with a notion of heaven in theafterlife may lead people to think that this life and the earthare not important.The group examined whether the worldviews created bysuch religions had a concept of stewardship over the earth,rather than dominance. The Old Testament and the Koranwere full of celebrations of the beauty and value of Godscreation. In Judaism, Islam and pre-modern Christianity therewas an emphasis on duty, responsibility and obedience toGod, not on individual rights. These concepts of responsibilitycould be extended to the natural environment created by God.Is dialogue between ‘Asian’ and ‘Western’ culturespossible, given fundamentally different worldviews? From amulticultural perspective, regardless of conceptual basis, isthere an underlying universal ecocentric worldview after all?The group felt that many differences between worldviewswere only in the detail. They suggested trees as an example.In the Shinto religion, trees are sacred. In Buddhism, treesare symbolic of key events in the life of the Buddha. In Maoriculture, trees are seen as environmental kin. In Arabiccultures, trees have no spiritual value, as there are no forests.On the other hand, world views were increasinglysecular, emphasizing individual rights. Secular science mayalso arrive at an ecocentric world view, as evolution tells uswe descended from single-celled organisms, and we are allpart of a system that began 3-4 billion years ago. Secularenvironmental ethics are based on an understanding ofecology, for example, Aldo Leopold’s Land Ethic, and theconcept of the human as a ‘plain citizen’ of the bioticcommunity.The report of the working group on Energy equity andhuman security was presented by their rapporteurs, Prof N.Manohar and Ms Nadja Tollemache. A number of issues wereidentified by the group.Energy needs are related to human rights such as lack ofbasic needs, food, clothing and shelter. While there arespecific human needs that must be met (and the groupindicated a need to enumerate what we consider the mostimportant), it does not mean that the same unsustainableways of meeting those needs that have evolved in the‘developed’ world should be introduced in countries that havenot got those facilities. Rather it should be an opportunity toassist the invention and spreading of new, sustainabletechnologies to make the life of the people more healthy,comfortable and pleasant. New technologies should suit thecurrent level of development and should help further augmentdevelopment and the social and economical security of thepeople.This will advance ‘human security’ from the point of viewof individual and community health and wellbeing, and be ofglobal benefit by showing that sustainable ways are possibleto meet basic needs- whether it be solar cooking or waterheating techniques, or appropriate building styles for naturalcooling of building interiors in hot countries, or using solar orwind turbine techniques on high rise buildings to produceelectricity and so on.There are also basic equity issues related to sharing offresh water supplies not only between communities withinnation states, but between upstream and downstreamcountries, and related to the avoidance of pollution and otheremissions affecting neighboring countries.Countries need to develop their own parameters in theireconomic policy, perspectives and ethos, keeping the spirit ofsatisfaction of national needs for peaceful use of the energytechnology within their reach. Strict legalistic approaches todevelopment issues devoid of social security and ethics wouldfail the law and its system; since the law sustains itself on thevalue of ethics undercurrent in a system.Human security is the ultimate goal surrounding theconcept of energy equity debate, keeping the ethics ofposterity in mind. Sustainable human security would balancethe needs and restraints against misuse of energytechnology. Regional cohesion is needed. Common concernand needs should be worked out. Regional unity andcooperation should be attained. Countries efforts tomonopolize the energy sector with technology havingtransnational environmental impacts should be properlymonitored with a sense of equity.The group suggested common sharing of energytechnology resources and facilities among the countries whichare proximate to each other in the region. Bilateral exchangesof knowledge will maintain a sharing culture while permittingindependent decisional decisions for countries.The group also suggested identifying the inhibitorsagainst achieving energy equity and human security in theregion. There is a need to address and identify who has to beinvolved or consulted in the project and which are theprobable interest groups. Each country's energy needs shouldbe assessed, as well as their economic system and theirability to provide energy equity for human security anddevelopment planning. Energy technology demands shouldbe assessed and bringing in technology from other countriesshould be a priority.Ultimately, however, the group felt that the definition ofenergy equity should be analyzed in greater detail, and that
Page 1 and 2: Eubios Journal of Asian andInternat
Page 5 and 6: Eubios Journal of Asian and Interna
Page 9: Eubios Journal of Asian and Interna
Page 22 and 23: 22Eubios Journal of Asian and Inter
Page 34: 34Eubios Journal of Asian and Inter

Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics EJAIB

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?