{"title":"内含但被忽视的价值观:绝对环境可持续性评估的道德方面","authors":"Mia Heide, Mickey Gjerris","doi":"10.1111/jiec.13472","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Currently used sharing principles (grandfathering and final consumption expenditure) do not align with the purpose of Absolute Environmental Sustainability Assessments (AESAs)—enabling all to meet basic needs within the planetary limits. This discrepancy, though niche within life cycle engineering, demands attention due to the integration of the sharing principles in the widely adopted Science Based Targets initiative, embraced by 4000+ companies, representing over a third of the global economy. This paper suggests operationalizing sufficientarianism as a fair sharing principle for AESAs guaranteeing a minimum threshold of well-being for all. The theory of human needs is highlighted to distinguish luxuries from necessities. This is vital when assigning shares to products/companies, as there's no room for luxuries (products for someone which cause others to fall short), given the extremely limited individual safe operating space, regardless of the sharing approach. This paper argues that sufficientarian-based sharing principles must overlook historically skewed material welfare distributions to ensure no one falls below the minimum threshold. It underscores the need for an interdisciplinary approach to sharing principles, acknowledging and discussing diverse value perspectives on equal grounds. The focus is to inform and discuss the development of new sharing principles, which introduces initial steps toward a sufficientarian-based approach. The paper concludes that recognizing embedded values is paramount in sharing principle development. Failing to do so risks letting quantifiable metrics dictate the values integrated into AESAs without open discourse.</p>","PeriodicalId":16050,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Industrial Ecology","volume":"28 3","pages":"386-396"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jiec.13472","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Embedded but overlooked values: Ethical aspects of absolute environmental sustainability assessments\",\"authors\":\"Mia Heide, Mickey Gjerris\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jiec.13472\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Currently used sharing principles (grandfathering and final consumption expenditure) do not align with the purpose of Absolute Environmental Sustainability Assessments (AESAs)—enabling all to meet basic needs within the planetary limits. This discrepancy, though niche within life cycle engineering, demands attention due to the integration of the sharing principles in the widely adopted Science Based Targets initiative, embraced by 4000+ companies, representing over a third of the global economy. This paper suggests operationalizing sufficientarianism as a fair sharing principle for AESAs guaranteeing a minimum threshold of well-being for all. The theory of human needs is highlighted to distinguish luxuries from necessities. This is vital when assigning shares to products/companies, as there's no room for luxuries (products for someone which cause others to fall short), given the extremely limited individual safe operating space, regardless of the sharing approach. This paper argues that sufficientarian-based sharing principles must overlook historically skewed material welfare distributions to ensure no one falls below the minimum threshold. It underscores the need for an interdisciplinary approach to sharing principles, acknowledging and discussing diverse value perspectives on equal grounds. The focus is to inform and discuss the development of new sharing principles, which introduces initial steps toward a sufficientarian-based approach. The paper concludes that recognizing embedded values is paramount in sharing principle development. Failing to do so risks letting quantifiable metrics dictate the values integrated into AESAs without open discourse.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16050,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Industrial Ecology\",\"volume\":\"28 3\",\"pages\":\"386-396\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jiec.13472\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Industrial Ecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jiec.13472\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Industrial Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jiec.13472","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Embedded but overlooked values: Ethical aspects of absolute environmental sustainability assessments
Currently used sharing principles (grandfathering and final consumption expenditure) do not align with the purpose of Absolute Environmental Sustainability Assessments (AESAs)—enabling all to meet basic needs within the planetary limits. This discrepancy, though niche within life cycle engineering, demands attention due to the integration of the sharing principles in the widely adopted Science Based Targets initiative, embraced by 4000+ companies, representing over a third of the global economy. This paper suggests operationalizing sufficientarianism as a fair sharing principle for AESAs guaranteeing a minimum threshold of well-being for all. The theory of human needs is highlighted to distinguish luxuries from necessities. This is vital when assigning shares to products/companies, as there's no room for luxuries (products for someone which cause others to fall short), given the extremely limited individual safe operating space, regardless of the sharing approach. This paper argues that sufficientarian-based sharing principles must overlook historically skewed material welfare distributions to ensure no one falls below the minimum threshold. It underscores the need for an interdisciplinary approach to sharing principles, acknowledging and discussing diverse value perspectives on equal grounds. The focus is to inform and discuss the development of new sharing principles, which introduces initial steps toward a sufficientarian-based approach. The paper concludes that recognizing embedded values is paramount in sharing principle development. Failing to do so risks letting quantifiable metrics dictate the values integrated into AESAs without open discourse.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Industrial Ecology addresses a series of related topics:
material and energy flows studies (''industrial metabolism'')
technological change
dematerialization and decarbonization
life cycle planning, design and assessment
design for the environment
extended producer responsibility (''product stewardship'')
eco-industrial parks (''industrial symbiosis'')
product-oriented environmental policy
eco-efficiency
Journal of Industrial Ecology is open to and encourages submissions that are interdisciplinary in approach. In addition to more formal academic papers, the journal seeks to provide a forum for continuing exchange of information and opinions through contributions from scholars, environmental managers, policymakers, advocates and others involved in environmental science, management and policy.