ABSTRACT
Traditional Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics have primarily focused on promoting sustainable finance, positive screening, and sustainability reporting. However, recent research highlights the urgency for greater accountability and action to counter species extinction. This article explores the potential of ESG frameworks in guiding corporate and managerial decision-making to address biodiversity loss. As the current ESG indicators exhibit an anthropocentric bias, limiting their effectiveness for protecting biodiversity, this article aims to strategically integrate pragmatic extinction accounting with an ecocentric (deep ecology) perspective. This perspective addresses the root causes of biodiversity loss and offers support to species that are perceived as economically, socially, or culturally unimportant. We present our findings as a call to all stakeholders-business and policy decision-makers, conservationists, and environmental organizations-to formulate robust, inclusive, and ecologically sensitive strategies incorporating deep ecological perspectives. The findings of this study include recommendations for the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). This study provides an important contribution to stakeholder theory that supports non-human stakeholders. Besides, this paper showcases how the improved ESG framework could empower companies to confront extinction risks in a more proactive and accelerated manner.
Subject(s)
Biodiversity , Commerce , Ecology , Extinction, BiologicalABSTRACT
Over the past 5 decades, scientists have been documenting negative anthropogenic environmental change, expressing increasing alarm, and urging dramatic socioecological transformation in response. A host of international meetings have been held, but the erosion of biological diversity continues to accelerate. Why, then, has no effective political action been taken? We contend that part of the answer may lie in the anthropocentric ethical premises and moral rhetoric typically deployed in the cause of conservation. We further argue that it is essential to advance moral arguments for biodiversity conservation that are not just based on perceived human interests but on ecocentric values, namely, convictions that species and ecosystems have value and interests that should be respected regardless of whether they serve human needs and aspirations. A broader array of moral rationales for biodiversity conservation, we conclude, would be more likely to lead to effective plans, adopted and enforced by governments, designed to conserve biological diversity. A good place to start in this regard would be to explicitly incorporate ecocentric values into the recommendations that will be made at the conclusion of the 15th meeting of the parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, scheduled to be held in October 2020.
La Necesidad del Ecocentrismo en la Conservación de la Biodiversidad Resumen Durante las últimas cinco décadas, los científicos han estado documentando el cambio ambiental negativo causado por la actividad humana, expresando cada vez una mayor alarma e insistiendo por una transformación socio-ecológica dramática como respuesta. Se han realizado un número de reuniones internacionales pero la erosión de la diversidad biológica se sigue acelerando. Entonces, ¿por qué no se han tomado acciones políticas efectivas? Sostenemos que parte de la respuesta a esta pregunta puede estar en las premisas éticas antropocéntricas y en la retórica moral que típicamente se despliega para la causa de la conservación. Además, argumentamos que es esencial promover argumentos morales para la conservación de la biodiversidad que no estén solamente basados en los intereses humanos percibidos sino en los valores ecocéntricos, principalmente la convicción de que las especies y los ecosistemas tienen valor e intereses que deberían respetarse sin importar si sirven a las necesidades y aspiraciones humanas. Concluimos que un conjunto más amplio de justificaciones morales para la conservación de la biodiversidad tendría mayor probabilidad de guiar planes efectivos, adoptados y aplicados por los gobiernos, diseñados para conservar la diversidad biológica. Un buen punto de partida al respecto sería la incorporación explícita de los valores ecocéntricos dentro de las recomendaciones que se harán al concluir la decimoquinta reunión de las partes que forman al Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica, programada para octubre 2020.
Subject(s)
Conservation of Natural Resources , Ecosystem , Biodiversity , Humans , MoralsABSTRACT
Compassionate conservation is based on the ethical position that actions taken to protect biodiversity should be guided by compassion for all sentient beings. Critics argue that there are 3 core reasons harming animals is acceptable in conservation programs: the primary purpose of conservation is biodiversity protection; conservation is already compassionate to animals; and conservation should prioritize compassion to humans. We used argument analysis to clarify the values and logics underlying the debate around compassionate conservation. We found that objections to compassionate conservation are expressions of human exceptionalism, the view that humans are of a categorically separate and higher moral status than all other species. In contrast, compassionate conservationists believe that conservation should expand its moral community by recognizing all sentient beings as persons. Personhood, in an ethical sense, implies the individual is owed respect and should not be treated merely as a means to other ends. On scientific and ethical grounds, there are good reasons to extend personhood to sentient animals, particularly in conservation. The moral exclusion or subordination of members of other species legitimates the ongoing manipulation and exploitation of the living worlds, the very reason conservation was needed in the first place. Embracing compassion can help dismantle human exceptionalism, recognize nonhuman personhood, and navigate a more expansive moral space.
Reconocimiento de la Calidad de Persona en los Animales dentro de la Conservación Compasiva Resumen La conservación compasiva está basada en la posición ética que parte de que las acciones tomadas para proteger a la biodiversidad deberían estar dirigidas por la compasión por todos los seres sintientes. Los críticos de esta postura argumentan que hay tres razones nucleares por las que el daño a los animales es aceptable dentro de los programas de conservación: el principal motivo de la conservación es la protección de la biodiversidad; la conservación ya es compasiva con los animales; y la conservación debería priorizar la compasión hacia los humanos. Usamos un análisis de argumentos para aclarar los valores y la lógica subyacentes al debate en torno a la conservación compasiva. Encontramos que el rechazo a la conservación compasiva es una expresión de la excepcionalidad humana, la visión de que los humanos están en un nivel categóricamente separado y de mayor moral que todas las demás especies. Por el contrario, los conservacionistas compasivos creen que la conservación debería expandir su comunidad moral al reconocer a todos los seres sintientes como personas. La calidad de persona, en un sentido ético, implica que el individuo merece respeto y no debería ser tratado solamente como un medio para otros fines. Si hablamos desde fundamentos científicos y éticos, existen muy buenas razones para extender la calidad de persona a todos los animales sintientes, particularmente en la conservación. La exclusión moral o la subordinación de los miembros de otras especies justifica la continua manipulación y explotación de los seres vivos, la justa razón por la que necesitamos de la conservación desde el principio. La aceptación de la compasión nos puede ayudar a desmantelar la excepcionalidad humana, a reconocer la calidad de persona no humana y a navegar un espacio moral más expansivo.
Subject(s)
Conservation of Natural Resources , Personhood , Animals , Biodiversity , Empathy , Humans , MoralsABSTRACT
Anthropologists have mediated between discriminated communities and outsiders, helping to influence public opinion through advocacy work. But can anthropological advocacy be applied to the case of violence against nonhumans? Ethical inquiries in anthropology also engage with the manifold ways through which human and nonhuman lives are entangled and emplaced within wider ecological relationships, converging in the so-called multispecies ethnography, but failing to account for exploitation. Reflecting on this omission, this article discusses the applicability of engaged anthropology to the range of issues from the use of nonhumans in medical experimentation and food production industry, to habitat destruction, and in broader contexts involving violence against nonhumans. Concluding that the existing forms of anthropological engagement are inadequate in dealing with the massive scale of nonhuman abuse, this article will suggest directions for a radical anthropology that engages with deep ecology, animal rights, animal welfare, and ecological justice.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Chronic diseases are a leading contributor to work disability and job loss in Europe. Recent EU policies aim to improve job retention among chronically ill employees. Disability and occupational health researchers argue that this requires a coordinated and pro-active approach at the workplace by occupational health professionals, line managers (LMs) and human resource managers (HRM). Little is known about the perspectives of LMs an HRM on what is needed to facilitate job retention among chronically ill employees. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore and compare the perspectives of Dutch LMs and HRM on this issue. METHODS: Concept mapping methodology was used to elicit and map statements (ideas) from 10 LMs and 17 HRM about what is needed to ensure continued employment for chronically ill employees. Study participants were recruited through a higher education and an occupational health services organization. RESULTS: Participants generated 35 statements. Each group (LMs and HRM) sorted these statements into six thematic clusters. LMs and HRM identified four similar clusters: LMs and HRM must be knowledgeable about the impact of chronic disease on the employee; employees must accept responsibility for work retention; work adaptations must be implemented; and clear company policy. Thematic clusters identified only by LMs were: good manager/employee cooperation and knowledge transfer within the company. Unique clusters identified by HRM were: company culture and organizational support. CONCLUSIONS: There were both similarities and differences between the views of LMs and HRM on what may facilitate job retention for chronically ill employees. LMs perceived manager/employee cooperation as the most important mechanism for enabling continued employment for these employees. HRM perceived organizational policy and culture as the most important mechanism. The findings provide information about topics that occupational health researchers and planners should address in developing job retention programs for chronically ill workers.
Subject(s)
Disabled Persons/statistics & numerical data , Health Workforce/statistics & numerical data , Occupational Health/statistics & numerical data , Personnel Turnover/statistics & numerical data , Work Capacity Evaluation , Chronic Disease , Europe , Female , Health Workforce/organization & administration , Humans , Male , Netherlands , Qualitative Research , Time Factors , Workers' Compensation , WorkplaceABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: There are few studies pertaining to asthma patients' views on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). The driving question behind the study is why some asthma patients choose noncompliance to conventional western medicine and resort to other modalities, often deemed as being 'alternative,' 'complementary,' or 'integrated.' Does the patients' emancipation movement lead to greater awareness of the benefits of alternative medicine? Does the patients' identity as asthma sufferers play a role in their decision? METHOD: Case studies based on semistructured interviews were conducted between June 2009 and January 2010 with 19 asthma patients in The Netherlands who have chosen complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Patients were contacted through online forum of Dutch asthma patients' organization Astma Fonds. DISCUSSION: We have discovered that on the whole patients in the present study were well informed about risks and benefits of both prescribed and alternative medicines. We have argued that noncompliance to medical regime by some asthma patients can be explained by the rationality of their choice based on evidence of clinical trials of commonly assigned asthma medication as well as partial and anecdotal evidence of the benefits of CAM therapies. It is the patients themselves who, by invoking the same evidence-based dominant paradigm choose to address the conflict between protagonists of 'conventional,' western medicine and other modalities. CONCLUSION: The author argues that asthma patients' noncompliance with (Western) medical regime and choice for alternative medical treatment of asthma is a matter of rational choice informed by evidence-based awareness. This evidence-based rationality particularly refers here to the patients' awareness of the rather controversial results of clinical trials of commonly used asthma medicines, particularly those containing elements of budesonide (Pulmicort), an anti-inflammatory corticosteroid, and formoterol (Oxis, Foradil), a rapid-acting and long-lasting beta(2)-agonist (bronchodilator).
Subject(s)
Anti-Asthmatic Agents/therapeutic use , Asthma/therapy , Complementary Therapies/standards , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/psychology , Adult , Aged , Asthma/drug therapy , Asthma/psychology , Complementary Therapies/psychology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Compliance/psychology , PatientsABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: While Human Resource Managers (HRM) and line managers could play a significant role in the prevention of job-related problems and in promotion of early job-continuation, it is not clear wether the chronically ill workers are recognized as a group. Unlike some other groups, distinguished by gender, age or ethnicity, those with chronic illness are less distinct and may not be included in diversity management programs. The aim of this research is to address theory and evidence in literature about the topic, as well as to inquire whether chronic illness of the employees is 'visible' in practice. METHODS: For desk research, we used a systematic search strategy involving medical, statistical, management, and social science databases (Web of Science, MedLine, Pub Med, Psych Info, etc.). Research results are based on case studies conducted with the managers and HRM of government and commercial organizations between March 2007 and October 2008 and between October 2008 and April 2009. These case studies were based on open interviews and focus group sessions (for human resource departments) which were consequently analyzed using thematical analysis. For group sessions, we used concept mapping to collect information from two groups of HRM professionals and managers. Secondary analysis included thematic and content analysis of 'best practice' organizations carried out by the Dutch organization Gatekeeper. CONCLUSIONS: We have discovered that the chronically ill employees are largely invisible to HRM practitioners, line managers who do not always have the right instruments for implementation of the European or national frameworks. Most practitioners are unaware of the impact of chronic illness in their organizations and in employees work life.
Subject(s)
Chronic Disease , Occupational Health Services/organization & administration , Organizational Culture , Organizational Policy , Personnel Management , Disabled Persons , Employment , Focus Groups , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Netherlands , Organizational Case StudiesABSTRACT
The present study examined efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) treatment in Dutch children with asthma in areas with differing air pollution. The study results indicate that TCM treatment of children living in more polluted urban area is less successful then that of children living in cleaner air area.
ABSTRACT
This article is based on semistructured interviews and focus groups conducted with 27 asthma patients in The Netherlands who chose complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for treatment of their condition. All subjects were contacted through an online forum for asthma patients hosted by the Dutch Asthma Foundation. Nineteen subjects (12 women and seven men) between the ages of 29 and 65 years participated in the interviews, held between June 2009 and January 2010. All of the participating subjects had experience with conventional medications, including anti-inflammatory corticosteroids and bronchodilators. For the focus group meeting, held in February 2010, the sample included seven subjects (four women and three men) between the ages of 31 and 46 years, none of whom had ever used conventional medication and all of whom were using CAM. All subjects in the sample had been diagnosed with asthma by their physician or lung specialist. The study examined the causes of patient noncompliance with the prescribed medical regime. It is argued that evidence-based rationality on the part of subjects is an overlooked dimension of their experience of asthma. This study demonstrates the role that the patients' social network, including medical practitioners, friends, and family, and other asthmatics, plays in the process of decision-making and choices about treating asthma. It also demonstrates the role of patients' information-searching strategies. The author concludes that patient noncompliance with commonly prescribed medication and selection of alternative medical treatment is less a matter of denial of their diagnosis or the severity of their illness, but more a matter of choice informed by evidence-based rationality.