Can we overcome the anthropocentrism bias in sustainability discourse?

Abstract

Based on a turn to the rational human subject in Descartes, Kant and Feuerbach, this article critically examines four efforts at shaping sustainability discourse: the definition of sustainability in our common future; stewardship in Christian theology; forms of partisan justice; and GDP as measure of economic growth. These efforts made certain advances, but because they share the underlying anthropocentric bias of Western philosophy, they fail to step out of the current sustainability paradigm. The article closes with two suggestions of how to decentre the human subject and build a network-view of all species. It is only with great effort that we have managed to make ourselves unhappy.

Climate change inaction: Cognitive bias influencing managers' decision making on environmental sustainability choices. The role of empathy and morality with the need of an integrated and comprehensive perspective

“…Even the images that are often seen on the consequences caused by global warming are not perceived as serious and do not arouse a sense of urgency and urgent danger Mazutis and Eckardt (2017), Newell and Pitman (2010) Anthropocentrism bias Difficulty in conceiving that in order to try to solve the problem of climate change, the human being should first of all be able to take a step back and see himself on a par with all other species as a whole in contact with nature. The tendency, on the other hand, seems to be to think solely that in order to try to solve the problem of climate change, human beings should first of all focus on their ability to implement sustainable development-Ensuring that their present needs are met without compromising the future generations the possibility of satisfying their own, demonstrating that they put only humans (and his descendants), at the center of everything Naudè (2017) Will bias Tendency to think that simply respecting the rules that the institutions (United Nations, European Union, etc. ), impose on the maximum emissions allowed, or on waste disposal, etc., means already doing enough or at least everything that is feasible to prevent environmental disasters caused by climate change.…”

Sustainability policies and practices at veterinary centres in the UK and Republic of Ireland

“…10 The Brundtland definition succeeded in acknowledging the biosphere's finite resources 13 and brought intergenerational ethics of resource use into sharp focus. 16 However, definitions have since evolved towards an ecological sustainability paradigm, which places inherent value on the ecosystem and supports interspecies and intergenerational justice. In the UN's updated Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Agenda for 2030, 17 'sustainability' includes environmental, human and animal welfare domains in line with the One Health concept, 18 and a recent development is the recognition of ultimate planetary boundaries that define a safe operating space for humanity 19 and limits to 'conventional' economic growth.…”

“…The Brundtland definition succeeded in acknowledging the biosphere's finite resources 13 and brought intergenerational ethics of resource use into sharp focus 16 . However, definitions have since evolved towards an ecological sustainability paradigm, which places inherent value on the ecosystem and supports interspecies and intergenerational justice.…”

Development of a Tool for Measuring Ecocentrism as an Outcome of Environmental Communication

“…Ecocentrism recognizes the intrinsic value of nature and the role played by humans in protecting and conserving the environment (Kopnina, 2017;Cocks & Simpson, 2015;Imram et al, 2014;McDonald, 2014;Kaufman, 2003;Brady & Pratt, 2005). This view of an equal relationship between humans and the environment (Cocks & Simpson, 2015;Nauda, 2017;Sagy & Tal, 2015) is important in developing peoples' environmental attitudes towards environmental problems. As an attitudinal outcome, ecocentrism can be achieved through environmental education and environmental communication.…”