Environmental ethics joseph desjardins pdf

Help your students think outside the classroom impact of environmental ethics issues Updated several times a day, Cengage Learning’s Global Environmental Ethics Watch is an ideal one-stop site for classroom discussion and research projects.

t d t thi k t id th l

Easily direct students to the resources most important to your course via specialized portals that focus on environmental issues such as animal welfare, ecofeminism, environmental economics, food ethics, and more.

Link to the latest information on key environmental issues from trusted academic journals, news outlets, and magazines, as well as to statistics, primary sources, case studies, podcasts, videos and much more.

To package access to Global Environmental Ethics Watch with any Cengage Learning text, including DesJardins Environmental Ethics, Fifth Edition, contact your Cengage Learning Representative.

and see the

Announcing Cengage Learning’s Global Environmental Ethics Watch

49975_ifc_ptg01_hires.indd 1 12/7/11 10:47 PM

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

JOSEPH R. DESJARDINS College of Saint Benedict/St. John’s University

Environmental Ethics

An Introduction to Environmental Philosophy

F I FTH ED IT ION

Australia • Brazil • Japan • Korea • Mexico • Singapore • Spain • United Kingdom • United States

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

This is an electronic version of the print textbook. Due to electronic rights restrictions, some third party content may be suppressed. Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. The publisher reserves the right to remove content from this title at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. For valuable information on pricing, previous editions, changes to current editions, and alternate formats, please visit www.cengage.com/highered to search by ISBN#, author, title, or keyword for materials in your areas of interest.

Printed in the United States of America 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 16 15 14 13 12

Environmental Ethics: An Introduction to Environmental Philosophy, Fifth Edition

Joseph R. DesJardins

Publisher: Clark Baxter

Acquisitions Editor: Joann Kozyrev

Associate Development Editor: Daisuke Yasutake

Assistant Editor: Joshua Duncan

Editorial Assistant: Marri Straton

Media Editor: Katie Schooling

Marketing Program Manager: Sean Foy

Design and Production Services: PreMediaGlobal

Manufacturing Planner: Mary Beth, Hennbury

Rights Acquisition Specialist: Shalice Shah-Caldwell

Cover Designer: Michelle DiMercurio

Cover Image: Getty Images

Compositor: PreMediaGlobal

© 2013, 2006, 2001 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the copyright herein may be reproduced, transmitted, stored, or used in any form or by any means graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, scanning, digitizing, taping, Web distribution, information networks, or information storage and retrieval systems, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without the prior written permission of the publisher.

For product information and technology assistance, contact us at Cengage Learning Customer & Sales Support, 1-800-354-9706

For permission to use material from this text or product, submit all requests online at www.cengage.com/permissions.

Further permissions questions can be e-mailed to permissionrequest@cengage.com.

Library of Congress Control Number: 2011941646

ISBN-13: 978-1-133-04997-5

ISBN-10: 1-133-04997-4

Wadsworth 20 Channel Center Street Boston, MA 02210 USA

Cengage Learning is a leading provider of customized learning solutions with office locations around the globe, including Singapore, the United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico, Brazil and Japan. Locate your local office at international.cengage.com/region

Cengage Learning products are represented in Canada by Nelson Education, Ltd.

For your course and learning solutions, visit www.cengage.com.

Purchase any of our products at your local college store or at our preferred online store www.cengagebrain.com.

Instructors: Please visit login.cengage.com and log in to access instructor-specific resources.

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

One summer morning, while driving through the countryside, my four-year-old son asked, “Daddy, what are trees good for?” Sensing a precious moment of parenthood,

I began gently to explain that as living things they don’t need to be good for anything, but that trees do provide homes to many other living things, that they make and

clean the air that we breathe, that they can be majestic and beautiful. “But daddy,” he said, “I’m a scientist and I know more than you because you forgot the most

important thing. Trees are good for climbing.” I hope that I have not missed too many other such obvious truths in writing

this book, which I dedicate to Michael and Matthew.

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

Contents

PREFACE x i

I Basic Concepts 1

1 Science, Politics, and Ethics 3

Discussion: Global Climate Change 3

Discussion Topics 6

1.1 Introduction: Why Philosophy? 6

1.2 Science and Ethics 8

1.3 Philosophy, Politics, and Ethical Relativism 15

1.4 Environmental Ethics: An Overview 16

1.5 Summary 18

Notes 19

Discussion Questions 19

Global Environmental Ethics Watch 20

2 Ethical Theories and the Environment 21

Discussion: Why Protect Endangered Species? 21

Discussion Topics 22

2.1 Introduction 23

2.2 Philosophial Ethics: Getting Comfortable with the Topic 24

2.3 The Natural Law Tradition—Teleology and Virtues 27

2.4 Contemporary Perspectives on Teleology 30

2.5 The Utilitarian Tradition 33

v Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights,

some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

2.6 Contemporary Perspectives on Utilitarianism 36

2.7 Deontology: An Ethics of Duty and Rights 37

2.8 Contemporary Perspectives on Deontological Ethics 38

2.9 Environmental Ethics and Religious Principles 40

The Good of God’s Creation 41

Finding the Divine in Nature 41

The Ultimate Respect for and Value of Life 42

Social Justice Ministries 42

Stewardship 43

2.10 Summary and Conclusions 43

Notes 44

Discussion Questions 44

Global Environmental Ethics Watch 45

II Environmental Ethics as Applied Ethics 47

3 Ethics and Economics: Managing Public Lands 49

Discussion: BP’s Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill 49

Discussion Topics 50

3.1 Introduction 51

3.2 Conservation or Preservation? 51

3.3 Managing the National Forests 54

3.4 Pollution and Economics 59

3.5 Ethical Issues in Economic Analysis 62

3.6 Cost-Benefit Analysis 64

3.7 Ethical Analysis and Environmental Economics 66

3.8 Summary and Conclusions 71

Notes 71

Discussion Questions 73

Global Environmental Ethics Watch 73

4 Sustainability and Responsibilities to the Future 74

Discussion: Sustainability: Fad or Future? 74

Discussion Topics 76

4.1 Introduction 77

4.2 Do We Have Responsibilities to Future Generations? 78

4.3 What do We Owe Future Generations? 81

4.4 Consumption and Sustainable Development 88

4.5 Summary and Conclusions 92

vi CONTENTS

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

Notes 92

Discussion Questions 94

Global Environmental Ethics Watch 94

5 Responsibilities to the Natural World: From Anthropocentric to Nonanthropocentric Ethics 95

Discussion: Industrial Farming: Mass Producing Animals as Food 95

Discussion Topics 97

5.1 Introduction 97

5.2 Moral Standing in the Western Tradition 98

5.3 Early Environmental Ethics 101

5.4 Moral Standing 105

5.5 Do Trees Have Standing? 108

5.6 Peter Singer and the Animal Liberation Movement 110

5.7 Tom Regan and Animal Rights 112

5.8 Ethical Implications of Animal Welfare 114

5.9 Critical Challenges 115

5.10 Summary and Conclusions 119

Notes 119

Discussion Questions 121

Global Environmental Ethics Watch 122

III Theories of Environmental Ethics 123

6 Biocentric Ethics and the Inherent Value of Life 125

Discussion: Synthetic Biology and the Value of Life 125

Discussion Topics 127

6.1 Introduction 127

6.2 Instrumental Value and Intrinsic Value 129

6.3 Biocentric Ethics and the Reverence for Life 132

6.4 Ethics and Character 135

6.5 Taylor’s Biocentric Ethics 136

6.6 Practical Implications 140

6.7 Challenges and Developments 143

6.8 Summary and Conclusions 145

Notes 146

Discussion Questions 147

Global Environmental Ethics Watch 148

CONTENTS vii

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

7 Wilderness, Ecology, and Ethics 149

Discussion: Wilderness Management: Fighting Fires in Yellowstone 149

Discussion Topics 151

7.1 Introduction 151

7.2 The Wilderness Ideal 153

7.3 The Wilderness “Myth”: The Contemporary Debate 157

7.4 From Ecology to Philosophy 163

7.5 From Ecology to Ethics 169

7.6 Varieties of Holism 171

7.7 Summary and Conclusions 173

Notes 173

Discussion Questions 175

Global Environmental Ethics Watch 176

8 The Land Ethic 177

Discussion: Hunting, Ethics, and the Environment 177

Discussion Topics 178

8.1 Introduction 179

8.2 The Land Ethic 180

8.3 Leopold’s Holism 183

8.4 Criticisms of the Land Ethic: Facts and Values 185

8.5 Criticisms of the Land Ethic: Holistic Ethics 189

8.6 Callicott’s Revisions 195

8.7 Summary and Conclusions 199

Notes 200

Discussion Questions 201

Global Environmental Ethics Watch 202

9 Radical Environmental Philosophy: Deep Ecology and Ecofeminism 203

Discussion: Environmental Activism or Ecoterrorism? 203

Discussion Topics 205

9.1 Introduction 205

9.2 Deep Ecology 207

9.3 The Deep Ecology Platform 208

9.4 Metaphysical Ecology 209

9.5 From Metaphysics to Ethics 212

9.6 Self-Realization And Biocentric Equality 216

viii CONTENTS

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

9.7 Criticisms of Deep Ecology 218

9.8 Ecofeminism: Making Connections 221

9.9 Ecofeminism: Recent Developments 224

9.10 Summary and Conclusions 227

Notes 228

Discussion Questions 231

Global Environmental Ethics Watch 231

10 Environmental Justice and Social Ecology 232

Discussion: Environmental Refugees 232

Discussion Topics 233

10.1 Introduction 233

10.2 Property Rights and Libertarian Justice 234

10.3 Justice as Fairness 238

10.4 Environmental Justice and Environmental Racism 240

10.5 Murray Bookchin’s Social Ecology 243

10.6 Critical Reflections 246

10.7 Summary and Conclusions 248

Notes 249

Discussion Questions 251

Global Environmental Ethics Watch 252

11 Pluralism, Pragmatism, and Sustainability 253

Discussion: Carbon Mitigation and Stabilization Wedges 253

Discussion Topics 254

11.1 Introduction: Agreement and Disagreement in Environmental Ethics 255

11.2 Moral Pluralism and Moral Monism 256

11.3 Environmental Pragmatism 259

11.4 Conclusion: Sustainability Revisited 263

Notes 265

Global Environmental Ethics Watch 265

GLOSSARY 267

INDEX 271

CONTENTS ix

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

Preface

One winter evening some years ago, I reread Aldo Leopold’s A Sand CountyAlmanac. This occurred a few months after I had moved to rural Minnesota from suburban Philadelphia. I came upon Leopold’s entry for February:

There are two spiritual dangers in not owning a farm. One is the danger of supposing that breakfast comes from the grocery, and the other that heat comes from the furnace. To avoid the first danger, one should plant a garden, preferably where there is no grocer to confuse the issue. To avoid the second, he should lay a split of good oak on the andirons, preferably where there is no furnace.

This passage struck me in a way that it never could have had I still been living in a metropolitan area. The fact that it was 27 degrees below zero outside, and I was sitting in front of a roaring oak fire might have had something to do with this. I recognized that there are more than just two spiritual dangers in not owning a farm; one other concerns divorcing your life from your work. That evening, I realized that teaching courses on environmental and ecological issues would mean more to me now, personally and professionally, than it could have in the city. This book grows out of a commitment to integrate more fully my life with my work.

The primary aim of this book is simple: to provide a clear, systematic, and comprehensive introduction to the philosophical issues underlying environmen- tal and ecological controversies. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, it is fair to say that human beings face environmental challenges unprecedented in the history of this planet. Largely through human activity, the very climate of the Earth is changing, and life on Earth faces the greatest mass extinctions since the end of the dinosaur age sixty-five million years ago. The natural resources that sustain life on this planet—air, water, and soil—are being polluted or depleted at alarming rates. Human population growth is increasing exponentially. When the first edition of this book was begun in 1990, the world population was 5.5 billion people.

xi Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights,

some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

By 2012 it will have grown to 7 billion, a 27 percent increase in just over twenty years. The prospects for continued degradation and depletion of natural resources multiply with this population growth. Toxic wastes that will plague future genera- tions continue to accumulate worldwide. The world’s wilderness areas—its forests, wetlands, mountains, and grasslands—are being developed, paved, drained, burned, and overgrazed out of existence.

The tendency in our culture is to treat such issues as simply scientific, techno- logical, or political problems. But they are much more than that. These environ- mental and ecological controversies raise fundamental questions about what we as human beings value, about the kind of beings we are, the kinds of lives we should live, our place in nature, and the kind of world in which we might flourish. In short, environmental problems raise fundamental questions of ethics and philosophy. This book seeks to provide a systematic introduction to these philosophical issues.

OVERVIEW

A significant amount of philosophically interesting and important research on environmental and ecological issues has been conducted during the past few dec- ades. The structure of this book reflects the way the fields of environmental ethics and environmental philosophy have developed during that period.

Two initial chapters introduce the relevance of philosophy for environmental concerns and some traditional ethical theories and principles. Chapters 3 and 4 sur- vey topics that essentially fit an “applied ethics” model. Traditional philosophical theories and methodologies are applied to environmental issues with the aim of clarification and evaluation. The applied ethics model, it seems to me, accounts for much of the early work in environmental ethics.

Philosophers soon recognized that traditional theories and principles were inadequate to deal with new environmental challenges. In response, philosophers began to extend traditional concepts and principles, so that they might become environmentally relevant. Chapter 5 examines attempts to extend moral standing to such things as individual animals, future generations, trees, and other natural objects. Within much of this thinking, traditional theories and principles remain essentially intact, but their scope and range are extended to cover topics not previously explored by philosophers.

Many philosophers working in this field have come to believe that ethical extensionism is an inadequate philosophical response to environmental issues and controversies. To many of these thinkers, traditional ethical theories and principles are part of a worldview that has been responsible for much environmental and ecological destruction. What is needed, in their eyes, is a more radical philosophi- cal approach that includes rethinking metaphysical, epistemological, and political, as well as ethical, concepts. At this point, the field once identified as environmental ethics is better conceived of as environmental philosophy. The final seven chapters examine more comprehensive environmental and ecological philosophies. These views include biocentrism (the view that all living things deserve moral standing),

xii PREFACE

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

ecocentrism (the view that shifts away from traditional environmental concerns to a more holistic and ecological focus), deep ecology, social ecology, and ecofeminism.

THE FIFTH EDITION

One strong temptation in writing a new edition is to create a much longer book. Keeping pace with new developments, including all the latest cases and environ- mental controversies, and embracing new ideas would all lead one to include more and more material. But one important lesson we learn from ecology is to recognize that not every change is an improvement and not all growth is devel- opment. My primary goal for this book remains what it was in the first edition, now nearly twenty years ago: to provide a clear and concise introduction to the philosophical issues underlying environmental controversies. This book has proved popular for use in courses taught outside of philosophy, which I take as some measure of success in achieving this goal.

This new edition attempts to respond to suggestions and advice from faculty and students who have been using this book. I owe a great debt to all the generous people who have contributed recommendations for this edition. The primary goal of this new edition is to keep apace of recent developments in the field, without sacrificing the original goal of writing a concise introductory text. I continue to seek a balance between philosophical depth and practical relevance. Admittedly, students do not always appreciate the details of philosophical debates and would rather we “get to the point.” But if there is any lesson to be drawn from the present political climate of rancorous partisan disagreement, it is that the world needs more, not less, careful and considered judgment.

Changes to this edition include new or significantly revised and updated dis- cussion cases at the start of most chapters. New material includes cases on global climate change, BP’s Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill, Synthetic Biology, Animals and Food, Sustainability, Hunting, Environmental Refugees, and Carbon Mitigation. I hope this new material will keep the book fresh for students and faculty alike. But the same basic format remains. Previous editions developed what has proven to be a coherent structure for presenting and teaching the content of environmental ethics and, for the most part, I have kept that structure as is.

But I have also done some minor restructuring of this edition to achieve greater clarity and coherence. I have combined the previous Chapter 9 (Deep Ecology) and Chapter 11 (Ecofeminsim) into a single chapter. I agree with reviewers who believe that neither field has developed much in the past decade, and that the material was no longer as cutting-edge as it had been. But both deep ecology and ecofeminism present intriguing and philosophically interesting perspectives that deserve attention, and each has had a significant impact on contemporary environmentalism. I have combined them into a single chapter because each is an example of a type of envi- ronmentalism—what I call radical environmentalism—which rejects reform in favour of more dramatic, radical social change.

PREFACE xiii

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

Careful readers will notice several other minor changes. The section on eth- ical relativism has been moved from the chapter on ethical theory (Chapter 2) into Chapter 1, so that it can be included in a new section on “Philosophy, Politics, and Ethical Relativism.” Chapter 1 also discusses the present partisan political climate in that same context, and backs away from a previous concern with an over-reliance on science in setting environmental policy. If only that were now the case that I thought it was two decades ago.

Finally, what previously was an epilogue has become a more extended discussion of pluralism, pragmatism, and sustainability. When I first added the epi- logue, issues of pluralism and pragmatism were just emerging as a serious topic among environmental philosophers. I have tried to extend this discussion to include some final reflections on sustainability. It seems to me that while theorists continue to debate the relative merits of various environmental philosophies, the issue that motivates us all—environmental destruction—marches on. The philosophical debates concerning pluralism and pragmatism, in my opinion, share with the issue of sustainable development an urgent need that something be done in the mean- time. Those who address these three topics seek a reasoned way to proceed even when a unified consensus on more theoretical issues remains elusive.

TO STUDENTS AND TEACHERS

Writing a book like this carries two intellectual dangers. One is the danger of supposing that students are as motivated by and interested in abstract philosophical issues as their teachers. The other is that in pointing to the immense practical relevance of environmental ethics, I ignore or understate the importance of care- ful and rigorous conceptual analysis. I have tried to address these dangers in a number of ways.

Each chapter begins with a description of a contemporary environmental controversy that can be used as an entry into the philosophical discussion that follows. These discussion cases describe issues that are at the forefront of the con- temporary environmental scene, and they implicitly raise fundamental ethical and philosophical questions. My hope is that after some directed reflection and discussion, students will see the need to address philosophical questions in devel- oping their own environmental and ecological positions. Each chapter also ends with a series of discussion questions that can be used either as the basis for a chapter review or as the basis for further study.

To avoid the second danger, I have tried to follow the philosophical debates far enough to provide an accurate example of how philosophers reason and how reasoning can make progress. There can be no substitute for a careful study and reading of the many primary sources that I have used in this book. But the nature of this book requires that these debates not be so comprehensive that readers get lost in, or bored by, the detail.

I have not always been successful in my own teaching at balancing a relevant introduction to the issues with an in-depth analysis. Without a clear context to

xiv PREFACE

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

motivate the need to know, students often get lost in philosophical analysis. On the other hand, without depth, students can become convinced too easily that they now know all the answers. Class time spent providing context, of course, takes away from time spent developing analysis; time spent following through on the debates prevents the forest from being seen for all the trees.

I wrote this book to address that tension. I suspect that for many teachers, the book provides a context and introduction, allowing them to use class time for fuller development of selected issues. They might do this in a number of ways: by reading classic or contemporary primary sources; by studying more empirical resources such as the Worldwatch publications; by keeping current on environ- mental controversies on the Web; by using some of the many excellent videos on environmental topics that are now available; and by addressing the claims of more activist groups ranging from the Sierra Club to Earth First!. However individual instructors choose to develop their courses, I hope that this book can provide a context to ensure that students remain as connected to the important philosophical issues as they so often are to the practical environmental ones.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I owe my greatest debts to those thinkers who are doing the original research in this field. I have tried to acknowledge their work at every turn, but if I have missed someone, I hope this general acknowledgment will suffice.

Through the years many reviewers have provided thorough, insightful, and tremendously helpful advice. Some have been willing to help on more than one occasion, and I must especially acknowledge Claudia Card of the University of Wisconsin, Arthur Millman of the University of Massachusetts in Boston, and Ellen Klein of the University of North Florida. Although their advice improved this book immeasurably, the usual disclaimers of responsibility apply. I have espe- cially benefited from advice offered by Holmes Rolston and Ernie Diedrich. My thanks also to previous edition reviewers Mary Brentwood, California State University, Sacramento; Douglas Browning, University of Texas, Austin; Larry D. Harwood, Viterbo University; Ned Hettinger, College of Charleston; Donald Hubin, Ohio State University; Dale Jamieson, University of Colorado; Kathie Jenni, University of Redlands; Sheldon Krimsky, Tufts University; Donald C. Lee, University of New Mexico; Eugene G. Maurakis, University of Richmond; Jon McGregor, Arizona State University; Greg Peterson, South Dakota State University; Wade Robinson, Rochester Institute of Technology; Arthur Skidmore, Kansas University; William O. Stephens, Creighton University; Charles Taliaferro, Saint Olaf College; Eugene Troxell, San Diego State University; and Charles Verharen, Howard University. And thanks to the new edition reviewers Benita Beamon, University of Washington; Joseph Chartkoff, Michigan State University; Johnna Fisher, University of British Columbia; Andre Goddu, Stonehill College; Gail Grabowsky, Chaminade University; Benjamin Hale, University of Colorado; Susan Mooney, Stonehill College; Paul Ott, Loyola University, Chicago; Kyle

PREFACE xv

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

Powys, Michigan State University; Patrick Walsh, University of Manitoba; Wei-Ming Wu, Butte College; and Jason Wyckoff, Marquette University.

My students at the College of St. Benedict and St. John’s University worked through early versions of this text. We were all students in those classes, and their comments helped substantively and pedagogically. The College of St. Benedict provided financial support for research during the writing of this book. Everyone associated with Wadsworth Publishing has once again provided generous, skillful, and intelligent support.

Global Environmental Ethics Watch

Updated several times a day, the Global Environmental Ethics Watch is a focused portal into GREENR—our Global Reference on the Environment, Energy, and Natural Resources—an ideal one-stop site for classroom discussion and research projects. This resource center keeps courses up-to-date with the most current news on environmental ethics. Users get access to information from trusted aca- demic journals, news outlets, and magazines, as well as statistics, an interactive world map, videos, primary sources, case studies, podcasts, and much more. Please contact your Cengage Learning Representative for information on how to get your students access to the Global Environmental Ethics Watch.

xvi PREFACE

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

P A R T I

Basic Concepts

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

1

Science, Politics, and Ethics

DISCUSSION: Global Climate Change

Scientists have long known that carbon dioxide is one of several atmospheric gases, along with water vapor, ozone, methane, and nitrous oxide which are responsible for maintaining stability in the Earth’s temperature. These so-called “greenhouse gases” function much as the glass in a greenhouse, which admits warming sunlight while preventing the warmer air from radiating back outside. This greenhouse effect is the reigning scientific explanation for how the atmo- sphere regulates the Earth’s temperature.

For over a century it has been under- stood that human activities, primarily those associated with burning fossil fuels in automobiles and industry, have been adding significant amounts of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is a major by-product of burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gasoline, and as human use of such fuels has increased, so too has the amount of carbon dioxide increased. By the 1980s,

some observers were claiming that increases in greenhouse gases could lead, and likely was leading, to an increase in global temperatures, or “global warming.” Many people predicted that an increase in global temperatures would cause considerable environmental dam- age and human suffering and, as a result, recommended policy changes to minimize the use of fossil fuels and otherwise limit the discharge of greenhouse gases.

The natural process associated with global warming is straightforward. Sunlight strikes the Earth’s surface and is radiated back as heat into the atmo- sphere. The Earth’s atmosphere is com- posed primarily of nitrogen (78 percent) and oxygen (21 percent). But many of the remaining trace elements, especially carbon dioxide, water vapor, methane, and ozone, have molecular structures that absorb the radiated heat and reflect it back into the atmosphere and back onto the Earth. The initial global warming

3 Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights,

some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

hypothesis claimed that because green- house gases trap heat in the atmosphere, an increase in the amount of greenhouse gases will result in an increase in the heat reflected back, thus increasing global temperature. In turn, an increase in global temperature could lead to such conse- quences as a rise in ocean levels due to melting of snow and ice in the Earth’s polar regions, climatic shifts, worldwide droughts and famine, shifts in oceanic currents, and massive extinctions of plant and animal life as a result of ecosystem disruptions.

Given such dire predictions, many environmentalists have advocated for significant policy and lifestyle changes, particularly involving reduction in CO2 emissions. Many recommended that countries should reduce their reliance on fossil fuels and support international treaties mandating CO2 reductions. Gov- ernments should create incentive pro- grams to reduce the use of carbon-based fuels, including taxes and carbon-trading credits. Governments should also provide incentives and subsidies for alternative energy sources. Institutions such as busi- nesses and universities should pledge to become “carbon-neutral.” Virtually every aspect of modern industrial economies would be affected by policies aimed at reducing carbon emissions.

Critics have challenged each step in this line of reasoning. While some early critics challenged the very idea of a greenhouse effect or the reality of increasing global temperatures, more recent critics have focused on the role of human activities in increasing the green- house effect and affecting climate change. While any cold spell or blizzard will be cited by some as evidence against global warming, scientific data has increasingly persuaded most observers that average overall global temperatures are increasing, even if not everyone agrees on the significance of the increase. Skeptics tend now to suggest that fluc- tuations in CO2 and other greenhouse gas levels are within normal limits when viewed over the long range. They suggest that the Earth’s climate has always fluc- tuated, and there is nothing to show that any changes presently occurring are not

within this normal range or that they are caused by humans. Many critics also dispute the catastrophic predictions based on the alleged fact of global warming. For example, increased temperatures could result in greater cloud cover due to increased evaporation, thereby reducing the overall amount of sunlight that reaches the Earth’s surface, thus reducing temperatures. Increasing temperatures could simply shift global climate making previously inhospitable areas more tem- perate and livable. The bottom line is that no one knows for certain what slightly increased global temperatures will bring about. Whatever changes occur will occur slowly, thereby giving the ever-adaptable human species plenty of time to adapt.

Further, critics reject many of the pro- posed policy changes that are offered by defenders of global warming. Less devel- oped countries argue that the costs of any reduction in worldwide CO2 levels will fall disproportionately on the poor. Having achieved high standards of living through fossil-fuel based economies, the rich now want to limit economic development of poorer countries in the name of reducing their carbon footprint. Furthermore, the economic changes required by a massive shift away from fossil fuels are likely to create as many new problems as would be avoided and, frankly, there really is no viable alternative to coal, natural gas, and oil to power the Earth’s economies.

As these debates developed, there has been a shift away from the language of “global warming” in favor of the lan- guage of “global climate change.” The rationale is that global warming refers to the average mean surface temperature, while global climate change refers to a broad range of climatic changes that would result from an increase in the average global temperature. Predictions made decades ago that increasing atmo- spheric carbon dioxide would lead to an increase in global temperatures have been proven true. But the consequences of those increased average temperatures are still evolving. An increase in greenhouse gases and an increase in overall average surface temperature does not necessarily result in warmer temperatures every- where and at all times. The complex

4 PART I BASIC CONCEPTS

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

relationships between air temperature, rainfall, ocean temperature, ocean cur- rents, and ocean levels could result in weather patterns that include lower tem- peratures in some places and fiercer win- ter storms. Defenders of this language change claim that greater clarity and pre- cision can be brought to these debates by speaking of global climate change rather than global warming.

Critics see this as a rhetorical ploy to shift attention away from lack of evidence for warming and allow environmentalists to claim that any change in the weather or climate is evidence for the result of increased CO2 emissions. If every weather event can be claimed as evidence of global climate change, then this alleged problem can never be tested and this suggests that it is not a scientifically validated empirical claim after all. In addition, while “global climate change” rhetorically suggests major and catastrophic changes, the fact is that the global climate is constantly changing and always has. Global climate change is the norm, not the problem it is made out to be.

At first glance, it might appear that debates about global warming are pri- marily scientific debates. The greenhouse effect would seem to involve questions about such phenomena as solar radiation and the structure of certain molecules in such science disciplines as atmospheric science, physics, and chemistry. Science would also seem to be the proper domain for determining the degree to which human activity is causing an increase in CO2 and other greenhouse gases. By measuring and comparing such things as the amount of CO2 at various levels of the polar ice cap or the growth rate found in the rings of old or fossilized trees, scien- tists can determine the degree of correla- tion between the amount of atmospheric CO2 and global temperatures in earlier periods of Earth’s history. Using such cor- relations, science predicts future tem- peratures based on anticipated CO2 levels. Over shorter terms, science can also trace trends in global temperatures, relative size of glaciers, ocean levels and tem- peratures, and habitat change, especially in northern climates.

In other words, resolving debates about global warming would seem to be

a matter of determining the facts, and facts, as we usually understand things, are the proper domain of science. If we simply do more and better science, gather more data, establish greater patterns of correlation and causality, and confirm more predictions, we will arrive at stron- ger conclusions and reach consensus on policy options. Many also conclude that if there is a scientific consensus on the facts of global warming and climate change, the practical conclusions for what we ought to do about it logically follow.

But despite increasing scientific study, disputes remain, and they remain because debates about global warming are not simply about the science and facts. Espe- cially within the United States, global warming has emerged as something of a political litmus test, as partisan as debates over big government, taxes, and abortion. One’s view on global warming seems to be determined as much by one’s political beliefs as by the facts. A 2008 Gallup poll reported that the gap between Democrats and Republicans has steadily increased during the past decade on such statements as “the effects of global warming have already begun,” “global warming is due more to human activities than natural causes,” and “global warming is occurring.” In each case, Republicans are much less convinced by the science of global warming than Democrats. The Congressional elections of 2010 produced Republican leaders who made skepticism about global warming a central political tenet. Within a month of becoming the new chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Congressman Fred Upton denied that climate change is human caused. Republican Congressman John Shimkus, who sits on both the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the Subcommittee on Energy and Environ- ment, expressed his skepticism about cli- mate change in terms of his belief in God’s promise to Noah that the Earth would not be destroyed by a flood for a second time.1

The prospect of global warming and global climate change raise fundamental questions concerning what we ought to do, both individually and as a society, about what we value, and about how we ought to live our lives. That is, they raise

CHAPTER 1 SCIENCE, POLITICS, AND ETHICS 5

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

fundamental questions not only for sci- ence but for ethics as well. Knowledge of the facts alone does not determine what should be done. Political debates about global warming also raise important questions on what we should believe, and the degree to which we should rely on science when making policy decisions. In other words, the prospect of global warming, like so many other environmen- tal issues, requires us to ask fundamental philosophical questions: What should we believe andwhy?What shouldwe do, both as individuals and as a society?What dowe value? What should we do when beliefs and values conflict? How should we live our lives?

DISCUSSION TOPICS: 1. Individuals seldom have the ability to

evaluate by themselves the validity of a scientific claim and often have to trust the judgments of experts. Consider how often you must trust the judg- ments of doctors and engineers for example. What evidence would per- suade you to trust those scientists who claim that global warming or global climate change is a factual event?What evidence would cause you to doubt those scientists? Where do you get your own information about global

warming? Is this a reliable source? Are the advocates on both sides of these debates equally worthy of trust? How would you distinguish between scien- tific “experts” who are persuaded by global warming and those who are skeptical?

2. Hundreds of college and university presidents have signed the “Presidents’ Climate Commitment,” which pledges their schools to achieve “climate neutrality as soon as possible.” (http:// www.presidentsclimatecommitment. org/) Has your school’s president signed this commitment? Why or why not? What steps, if any, has your school taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Do you support this commitment by your school?

3. Do you think that more developed countries such as the United States, Canada, England, and Germany have a greater responsibility for reducing greenhouse gas emissions than devel- oping countries such as China, India, and Brazil? What arguments can be offered for each side of this debate?

4. Would you support a tax on carbon emissions, and therefore higher prices for electricity and gasoline, as a means to reduce greenhouse gases? Why, or why not?

1 .1 I NTRODUCT ION : WHY PH ILOSOPHY?

In the early decades of the twenty-first century it is fair to say that human beings face environmental challenges unprecedented in the history of this planet. Largely through human activity, life on Earth faces the greatest number of mass extinctions since the end of the dinosaur age 65 million years ago. Some esti- mates suggest that more than 100 species are becoming extinct every day and that this rate could double or triple within the next few decades.2 The natural resources that sustain life on our planet—the climate, air, water, and soil—are being changed, polluted, or depleted at alarming rates. Human population growth is increasing exponentially. World population reached 7 billion people in 2011, just 12 years after reaching 6 billion. Although it took all of human history until 1804 for world population to first reach 1 billion people, the most recent increase of 1 billion took just 12 years. The rate of population increase is slowing somewhat. It is estimated that it may take 15 years to add the next

6 PART I BASIC CONCEPTS

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

1 billion people. Unfortunately, however, disease, famine, poverty, and war are among the factors contributing to this decline in the rate of growth. The pros- pects for continued degradation and depletion of natural resources multiply with population growth. Not only are there more people using more resources, but the lifestyles of that growing population place increasing demands on the bio- sphere. Toxic wastes that will plague future generations continue to accumulate worldwide. Some forms of nuclear waste will remain deadly for tens of thousands of years. The world’s wilderness areas—its forests, wetlands, topsoils, mountains, and grasslands—are being developed, paved, drained, burned, and overgrazed out of existence. Destruction of large areas of the ozone layer and a significant increase in greenhouse gases that could result in global warming demonstrate that human activity threatens to disrupt the very atmosphere and climate of the planet Earth.

Complicating matters is the fact that many environmental topics, from global warming to land use, from energy policy to food production, have become embroiled in bitter partisan politics, especially within the United States. The days in which a Republican President (Richard Nixon) and a Democratic Congress could be unified in passing sweeping environmental legislation such as the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, and the Endangered Species Act within a three-year period, are a distant memory.

Faced with such a potentially catastrophic environmental future, we are challenged with momentous decisions. But how do we even begin making the right decisions, especially in such a political climate as the present? We should also acknowledge that many of our present environmental challenges are the result of decisions made, not by thoughtless or dishonorable people, but in good faith by previous generations. In fact, many of those decisions had very beneficial consequences to both prior and present generations in the form of adequate food, affordable energy, and increased life expectancy. But these deci- sions have had devastating consequences as well. How can we be sure that the decisions about energy policy, population, and food production that we likewise make in good faith will not have equally ambiguous consequences? Before making such momentous decisions, it seems only reasonable that we should step back to reflect on the decision-making process itself.

In many ways, philosophical ethics is just this process of stepping back to reflect on our decision making. Philosophical ethics involves a self-conscious stepping back from our own lives to reflect on what type of life we should live, how we should act, and what kind of people we should be. This textbook will introduce environmental ethics by working across two levels of thought: the practical level of deciding what we should do and how we should live, and the more abstract and academic level of stepping back to think about how we decide what to do and what to value. As used in this book, philosophical ethics involves elements of practical normative ethics—deciding what one ought or ought not do—and critical thinking—evaluating the reasoning used to justify and defend such practical decisions.

Philosophical ethics in the West is exemplified by Socrates’s questioning of Athenian society and an individual’s role within it. When speaking with a self-proclaimed authority on what the gods expect of humans, Socrates set the

CHAPTER 1 SCIENCE, POLITICS, AND ETHICS 7

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

standard of philosophical reasoning 2,500 years ago by refusing to accept a con- clusion based solely on the words of an authority. When the religious authority Euthyphro claimed that he knew many things about the gods’ desires of which most people were ignorant, Socrates responded with what is perhaps the most crucial philosophical call: “Let us examine what we are saying” so that we might all come to learn for ourselves what is true.

This textbook invites you on a similar Socratic journey with respect to envi- ronmental topics. Let us examine what is being said so that we might think for ourselves and better understand what is true and what we ought to do. This text introduces the many ways in which ethics and philosophy can contribute to the creation of a sane and judicious environmental policy. Environmental challenges such as global warming raise fundamental scientific and political questions, but they raise important philosophical questions as well. Ethics is the branch of phi- losophy that addresses questions on fundamental values, and these will be the primary focus of this book. However, as we shall see, engaging in a full analysis of environmental issues will require that we also address a wide range of ques- tions from other branches of philosophy. Topics such as the allocation and distribution of environmental benefits and dangers raise important questions of social justice and political philosophy. Issues of moral standing for future generations, animals, and other nonhuman forms of life and the nature of such abstract entities as species and ecosystems raise important questions in epis- temology and metaphysics.

A basic assumption of this book is that environmental policy ought to be decided in the political arena and not by experts in scientific laboratories, corpo- rate boardrooms, or government bureaucracies. But to say this is not to say that all political opinions are equal. In an era when name-calling, shouting matches, and demonization of those with whom one disagrees passes for political debate, the need for critical thinking—careful, logical examination of controversial issues—has never been greater. Philosophical ethics will ask you to put aside what you hear from political pundits and commentators on Fox News or the Daily Show, sus- pend your assumptions and what you think you already know, and think carefully in as unbiased and balanced way as you can.

Thus an implicit goal of this textbook is to empower citizens to become full and thoughtful participants in these critical public policy debates. Familiarity with the ethical and philosophical issues involved in such debates is an important first step in this direction. Every position staked out in an environmental controversy will involve philosophical assumptions. Your challenge is to separate the good arguments from the bad, the rational conclusions from the unproven. Join with Socrates to examine what we are saying so that we might come to know what is true.

1 .2 SC IENCE AND ETH ICS

Environmentalists have long had an ambiguous relationship with science and technology. On one hand, science provides exactly the type of unbiased and rational source of information that citizens need for informed and rational policy

8 PART I BASIC CONCEPTS

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.

making. Trusting science seems a reasonable strategy. Technology offers hope for addressing most, if not all, environmental challenges. On the other hand, science and technology have also played a major role in bringing about some of the worst environmental problems that we face. Blind trust of science and technol- ogy can appear as unreasonable as blind trust of political pundits. Surely science and technology must be a major partner in addressing environmental chal- lenges, but it is important that we not abdicate decision-making responsibility to science alone and that we think carefully about the proper role of science and technology.

One of the pivotal events of the modern environmental movement was the publication of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring in 1962. This book focused inter- national attention on the deadly effects of DDT and other chemical pesticides. The continued indiscriminate use of these “elixirs of death” would, according to Carson, lead to a time when death and poisoning would silence the “voices of spring.” This book profoundly influenced the public’s attitude toward chemical pollution and environmental protection. For the first time, widespread public doubt was raised about the safety and desirability of technological solutions to environmental problems.

Although chemical agents have been used to control pests and fertilize crops since the beginning of agriculture, the decades immediately after World War II witnessed tremendous development in the discovery, production, and use of synthetic chemical pesticides and fertilizers. Increasing population growth and a corresponding increase in demand on agriculture, along with a decrease in the number of farmers, led to intense pressures to increase agricultural productivity. One large part of this effort involved the use of chemicals to limit crop loss from pests and to enhance the growth of crops. Before the publication of Silent Spring, the only question generally asked about chemical pesticides and fertilizers, by both scientists and the public, concerned their effectiveness: Do they eliminate undesirable pests without harming humans or their crops? Do they increase yield? After Carson’s work, the long-term consequences to both humans and the natural world, as well as the political and ethical implications of chemically enhanced agriculture, came to the forefront.

Even seemingly innocuous issues such as fertilizer and pesticide use can raise philosophical questions. For example, do we have any ethical responsibility to preserve the various life forms around us? Is there anything wrong with defining some living organisms as pests and working to eradicate them? Philosophical assumptions are involved wherever we stand in this debate. Should pesticides be proved safe before they are used, or should the burden of proof rest with those who predict danger? Answering this question also involves issues in ethics and political philosophy.

Relying on science or technology (or on economics or the law) without also considering the ethical and philosophical issues involved can raise as many problems as it solves. Leaving environmental decisions to the “experts” in science and tech- nology does not mean that these decisions will be objective and value-neutral. It means only that the values and philosophical assumptions that do decide the issue will be those that these experts hold.

CHAPTER 1 SCIENCE, POLITICS, AND ETHICS 9

Copyright 201 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.