I submit that for the most part, the defenders ofLeopold's position are not well-prepared to answer these challenges,not because these defenders are careless, irrational, biasedromantics and partisans, but because the metaethical issues ofmeaning and justification emerge from and deal with some of the mostprofound, obscure and stubborn problems of moral philosophy.
Yet somesort of informed, thoughtful and critical response to the metaethicalissues of environmental ethics is essential if this new field ofethics is to receive the scholarly attention that its normativeurgency demands.
This careless equation ofmeaning leads to a great deal of confusion and befuddlement in moralarguments, most notably arguments over such issues as abortion,euthanasia, and environmental ethics.
The issues surrounding the natural environment, and those measures necessary to save it, are pervasive themes in current Australian political and social discourse; awareness is high, and opinions are divided.
In these present days we have a lot of ethical issue in our day to day living going from conflict of interest all the way up to cutting corners in the petroleum industry.
In response to the health and physical safety risks posed by climatic-environmental disasters, both acute and sustained, migration can be a survival strategy. Yet populations in low-income countries whose health is most at risk from climate change (), and where there are often high pre-existing levels of health problems, are used to coping with adverse health outcomes without recourse to migration. It is likely that population movement that is driven substantially by health risks will occur only where those risks are sufficiently serious and widespread. The following example, from the Horn of Africa, is illustrative.
A positive example of collaboration is the Wabanaki Traditional Cultural Lifeways Exposure Scenario (). In addition to the fundamental benefit of funding the tribes to develop their own report, this process represents an example of true intergovernmental consultation. Although the scenario development did not involve human subjects research, the consequences of underestimating environmental exposure rates could affect tribal health and sovereignty, so the principles of informed consent were followed. Because tribal leaders were not trained in risk assessment methodology, the approach and assumptions were discussed with tribal leaders and staff. Throughout the duration of the project, each tribe (through designated representatives) gained a basic understanding of the process, methods, and risks and benefits, while retaining control over the substance of the report.
Despite advances in general bioethics, federal initiatives such as environmental justice, and international recognition of indigenous rights (), there are recent examples of missteps, such as the Havasupai case where members of the tribe accused researchers of improperly using tribe members’ blood samples in genetic research. This case resulted in significant adverse impacts to indigenous peoples [; National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) 2006]. Equally disrespectful are the academic habits of attending tribal events, interviewing tribal members, and then writing first-author publications without IRB review or informed consent and tribal permission, or of failing to work with tribal researchers and then misinterpreting tribal information but publishing results as if they were accurate (, ; ). These academic practices irritate tribal scientists, perpetuate inaccuracies (), and do a great disservice to tribes and harm to tribal members because of publication of false information ().
Environmental awareness has called attention to the situation and city developers and planners have been looking for a good model how to plan future cities to address this issue.
American Indians’ circumstances present situations that require greater efforts at informed consent. Tribes are often more vulnerable because they are in the difficult position of seeking data and research funds while struggling against simply “being studied.” The inherent coercion must be minimized as a core tenet of bioethics (). Furthermore, modern research may be so complex that even a fully competent nonspecialist might not understand the disclosed information accurately enough to make a truly informed decision (). The ability of a tribe to give fully informed consent requires extra explanation and/or trained tribal staff who can consider the risks and benefits from a perspective inside the subject group’s legal, political, and cultural milieu. In addition, it is worthwhile to consider how the research will affect the tribal community as a whole, beyond the risks that may be incurred by the individual participants in the research project (). CBPR projects that help build capacity (skills, understanding, data, or equipment) within a tribe help overcome obstacles to informed consent.
One of the best examples of how to integrate mass transit and other environmentally friendly policies into the modern city has been found in Curitiba, Brazil....
This paper will dive deeper into this issue by comparing the "tourist" through the sexualized tourism market in Brazil and more ethical forms of alternative tourism, such as volunteer tourism....