BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT

Environmental Science Module No. 2.0

Prepared by:
ARNOLD B. FONOLLERA, PhD

Biological Sciences Department

College of Science & Computer Studies
De La Salle University - Dasmariñas

1
 BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT

Environmental Science Module No. 2.0

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Title Page
2.0 Gospel Reflection 2
2.1 Expected Learning Outcomes 3
2.2 Introduction 3
2.3 Environmental Science and Ecology 4
2.4 Environmental Principles 5
2.5 Environmental Ethics 6
2.6 Environmental Attitudes 8
2.7 Relevant Environmental Attitudes and Behavior 9
2.8 Environmental Justice and Governance 11
Key Takeaways 12
Available Books and Online Resources 13
Formative Assessment 14

2
 BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT

Environmental Science Module No. 2.0

2.O GOSPEL REFLECTION

Genesis 1:1-31

“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without
form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God
was hovering over the face of the waters. And God said, “Let there be light,” and
there was light. And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the
light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called
Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day. ...”

INSTRUCTION:

Using the space below, write a reflection essay based on the Bible verse above. In your essay,
how do you relate the bible verse into your study of environmental science? How do you think
this bible verse connect to this module.

3
 BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT

Environmental Science Module No. 2.0

2.1 EXPECTED LEARNING OUTCOMES

At the end of the module, you should be able to:

• Understand how nature works and realize that humans and other organism have an
impact on their surroundings.
• Determine how environmental problems emerge and why they are complex and
interrelated, involving not only scientific issues but also social, ethical, political and
economic issues.
• Recognize possible solutions to environmental problems, although not often easy to
achieve due to the different scenarios and circumstances.

2.2 INTRODUCTION

Environmental science is the interdisciplinary study of the environment, incorporating different

fields of science, each with its respective approach in addressing various environmental issues
and problems, both on a local or global perspective. It is humanity’s relationship with the earth’s
living and nonliving components. Moreover, environmental science is a continuously evolving
field, having its roots in early civilization, where many ancient cultures revere nature, providing
us with food, water and shelter. These are just among the many services recognized even by
many modern people. In the early 1980s, industry was seen as the major contributor to air and
water pollution, but with technological advancements in industrial pollution control, industries are
no longer the major sources of pollution. It has become apparent that the actions and lifestyles
of individual citizens have become the major sources of pollution. Thus, we are now witnessing
the emergence of new environmental problems. Climate change-related disasters, emerging
wastes, COVID-19 pandemic and other similar outbreaks, unmitigated mass tourism, genetically
modified organisms and biodiversity loss are among the fast-emerging issues that over time, will
assume greater importance.

2.3 Environmental Science and Ecology

The word environmental usually refers to the conditions around which affects people and
other organisms. In a broader context, environmental science is the study of the interactions
between humans, other organisms, and their surroundings and how these interactions affect
their surroundings. Thereupon, environmental changes from these activities will eventually
have repercussions on humans and other organisms.

Ecology on the other hand, is a branch of biological science that deals with the relationships
between living things and the non-living components of the environment and plays an
important role in environmental science. Its focus of study is the ecosystem. An ecosystem
occupies an important hierarchy in the level of organization in nature, more complex than a
community, consisting of organisms interacting with one another and with the nonliving
matter and energy within a defined area. An example is a forest ecosystem consisting of
plants (mostly trees), animals and microorganisms that decompose, all interacting with each

4
 BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT

Environmental Science Module No. 2.0

other and interacting with the physical and chemical components of the air, water and soil,
driven by the life-sustaining energy of the sun.

2.4 Environmental Principles

The study of environmental science deals with interactions and relationships existing in
nature in which man has a profound influence in many of its processes. We do not only deal
with relationships between the biotic and abiotic factors, but we also deal with people – the
culture, politics, economics and social life. Many environmental problems are rooted within
the various structures of society, and unless we look into the socioeconomic and political
aspects of our society would we be able to solve these environmental problems.

With millions of years of evolution, nature has established stability and homeostasis that
allowed life to flourish in relative harmony. From this viewpoint, a number of so-called
‘environmental principles’ can serve as a guide on how society can establish its harmonious
relation with nature.

a) Interdependence and Interconnectedness.

“Everything is connected to everything else,” is a fitting phrase to describe what one
does will affect another, whether directly or indirectly. In nature, living things are
interdependent on one another and with their surroundings. To understand the intricacies of
environmental problems will require a knowledge of the social, physical, and biological
sciences. Primarily, the way Man relates to his environment and resources is influenced by
his culture, and in so doing, makes the natural and human resources intimately linked, such
that the use or misuse of one will affect the other.

The food chain and food web are prime examples to illustrate the interdependence and
interconnectedness between the many biotic components of the ecosystem. Moreover, it is
not limited to living things alone but also the connection of the biotic factors with the physical
factors. For example, how the type and distribution of soil, chemical characteristics of the
water affects the distribution of organisms.

b) Change and Material Cycles

“Everything in Nature Changes” and that species and environments are constantly
changing. Some changes improve the quality of the environment while others create impacts
that degrade it. Changes with adverse impacts have to be avoided, prevented, mitigated or
controlled, whichever approach is sustainable.

Materials in the environment undergo cyclic changes, passing through geologic and
biological systems. Likewise, when energy flows through nature, it is neither created nor
destroyed, but changes from one form to another.

“Everything in Nature has to go Somewhere”. Materials are natural resources, but when
placed in the wrong place at the wrong time become wastes and pollute the environment,
diminishing the utility of a resource. We have to remember that the Earth is a closed system,

5
 BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT

Environmental Science Module No. 2.0

and that its self-cleaning capacity is limited. Many would argue that pollution is a necessary
evil, that while it is inevitable in many circumstances can be efficiently controlled using
innovative, environment-friendly approaches.

c) Law of Limits and Population Dynamics

Carrying capacity is the maximum number of users of a resource without creating adverse
environmental impacts. An ecosystem can support only a certain number of individuals at a
given time. When the carrying capacity is exceeded, an imbalance in the system occurs.

d) Diversity and Stability

“All Forms of Life are Important”, and as organisms require a place to thrive on, “All
Ecosystems are Important” as well. Therefore, the more diversity among life forms and
ecosystems are, the more resilient and stable the environment will be. Protected areas,
nature reserves and wildlife conservation areas are invaluable in ensuring biodiversity in the
genetic, species and ecosystem levels. Likewise, respect for human cultures also promote
social and environmental stability.

e) Balance of Nature and Stewardship

“Nature Knows Best” is an affirmation that Nature has its own laws and processes to
maintain itself, and therefore going against what Nature prescribes will have undesirable
consequences. As another saying goes, “There’s No Such Thing as a Free Lunch”.
Although Nature is capable of self-maintenance and self-regulation, human activities should
be consistent with the natural laws and processes. We should bear in mind that humans are
part of nature. We are not masters but stewards of the Earth and its resources. “Nature is
God’s gift to all and it is everybody’s duty to protect it.” It has its own value, regardless
of its value to humans. Therefore, Man is morally responsible for decisions relating to his
environment.

f) Finiteness of Resources
“Ours is a finite Earth”, means that most resources are nonrenewable, vulnerable to
depletion and degradation unless it is used prudently and wisely. But as populations increase
and the demand for resources increase, bear in mind that Nature has limits beyond which its
resources can no longer sustain overpopulation. The use of resources must ensure
maximum benefits not only for the present but for future generations for an indefinite period
of time. Shifting to an environment-friendly lifestyle can reduce the demand for resources
and environmental stress.

2.5 Environmental Ethics

Ethics is a branch of philosophy which transcends all cultural and religious boundaries to
discern fundamentally what is right and what is wrong. Most cultures have a reverence for
life and hold that all humans have a right to live, and therefore considers unethical to deprive
an individual of life. In contrast to morals, morals reflect the predominant mindset of a society
about ethical issues at a distinct time period. Although most cultures share the same view
that it is certainly unethical to kill a person. However, when circumstances compel a country

6
 BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT

Environmental Science Module No. 2.0

to declare war against a hostile state, majority of the population accept the necessity of killing
the enemy, as an act of self-defense or a means of self-preservation. During a state of war,
killing the enemy is a moral thing to do even though ethics says that killing is wrong. No
nation has ever declared an immoral war. Even Adolf Hitler view the necessity of war as a
moral act of delivering the German nation from the oppressive conditions set forth by the
Treaty of Versailles after the First World War, which left Germany in ruins, politically and
economically.

Resolving environmental issues require a consideration of both ethics and morals. When the
government imposed a nationwide enhanced community quarantine during the COVID-19
Pandemic and people were required to stay indoors for a certain period, local food supplies
were adequate enough to feed the population. It would be unethical to allow some people,
particularly the poor to starve during the quarantine period while others have more than
enough. Lamentably, a pervasive social problem among those in the higher social classes
is one of indifference. They don’t feel morally obligated to share what they have with others.
The situation reveals the grim reality that this indifference makes it permissible to allow poor
people to starve while urging them to stay indoors so as not to pose a risk to others. This
moral stand is not consistent with a purely ethical one.

Ethics and morals are not always on the same plane of thought. Because of this ambiguity,
it is often difficult to define what is right and what is wrong. Some people view that global
warming as serious and have reduce their fossil fuel consumption. Others doubt that there
is a problem and so have not modified their energy use. Still others do not care what the
situation is. They will use fossil fuels as long as it is available.

Other issues are population and pollution. With world population at 7.8 billion in 2020 and
the Philippine population at 109.5 million, is it ethical to have more than two children in a
world beset with overpopulation? Is it ethical for the plastics industry to lobby to legislators
to vote no on a bill banning plastics because it might reduce profits, even though its passage
would improve the environment? The stand we take on such issues often depends on our
position. For example, government does not look upon mining as negatively as indigenous
people who are displaced do as a result of mining activities. In fact, many business leaders
view the behavior of hard-core environmentalists as immoral because it restricts growth and,
in some cases, causes unemployment.

Many ethical questions are very complex. Ethical issues concerning the environment is no
different and has to be dealt with objectively. It is important to explore environmental issues
from several points of view before taking a stand. When we decide to take an ethical stand,
we become prey to attack from

those who disagree with our stand, and have to endure the stigma of being portrayed as
villains for pursuing a course of action against which the opposing party consider righteous.

7
 BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT

Environmental Science Module No. 2.0

Environmental ethics is a topic of applied ethics that examines the moral basis of
environmental responsibility with the end goal focused on the moral foundation of
environmental responsibility and how far this responsibility extends. There are three primary
theories of moral responsibility regarding the environment, all of which supports
environmental responsibility but whose approaches are different:

a) Anthropocentric or human-centered. Environmental anthropocentrism revolves around

environmental responsibility derived from human interest alone. It is assumed that only
human beings are morally significant organisms and have a direct moral standing. Since a
healthy environment is paramount to human existence, we have a duty toward the
environment in the pursuit of human interests. Proponents contend that our environmental
duties are derived both from the immediate benefit that the present generation receive from
the environment as well as from the benefit that future generations of people will receive. But
critics argue that since future generations of people do not yet exist, then, strictly speaking,
they cannot have rights any more than a dead person can have rights. Indisputably, both
parties acknowledge that environmental concern derives solely from human interests.

b) Biocentric. This is a widely embraced view that all forms of life have an inherent right to
exist. Some biocentric advocates give species a hierarchy of values, where they contend
that we have a greater responsibility to protect animal species than plant species, while
others say that the rights of certain species are denied from where the rights of humans
begin. For example, when rats and mosquitoes are labelled as pests, they see nothing wrong
in exterminating them. Extreme biocentrists believe that each individual organism, not just
each species, has a basic right to survive. On a different note, animal rights advocates put
more value on animals than on plants. Trying to decide which species deserve protection
from death or early extinction due to human activities is an ethical dilemma, where, it is very
difficult to be ethically consistent.

c) Ecocentrism. This is a holistic view that maintains that the environment deserves direct
moral consideration and not one that is merely derived from human and animal interests.
This comes with a view that the environment has direct rights, which entitles it with moral
personhood, deserving of a direct duty to be protected, and that it has inherent worth. The
environment, by itself, is considered morally at par with humans.

Planetary health advocates argue that the “right” of the planet is a natural extension of the
concept of human rights and therefore entitled to a similar degree of environmental
protection. Moreover, environmental ethics consider one’s actions towards the environment
as a matter of right and wrong, rather than one of self-interest.

2.6 Environmental Attitudes

There are many different attitudes about the environment, most of which fall under one of
three heading: a) the development ethic, b) the preservation ethic, c) the conservation ethic.
Each of these ethical positions has its own code of conduct against which ecological morality
may be measured.

8
 BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT

Environmental Science Module No. 2.0

a) The development ethic is based on individualism or egocentrism. It assumed that the

human race is and should be the master of nature and that the Earth and its resources exists
for our benefit and pleasure. Many believed the moral ascendancy for this view was gained

from the Old Testament, Genesis 1:26 where God said, “Let Us make Man in Our image,
after Our likeness, to rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock,
and over all the earth itself and every creature that crawls upon it.” and Genesis 1:28 where
God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill

the earth and subdue it; rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and every
creature that crawls upon the earth.

This view is further reinforced by the work ethic, which dictates that humans should
continuously effect change and that resources utilized represent “progress and prosperity”,
which itself is good. The idea that “if it can be done, it should be done” is the motivating
factor that drives our actions and energy when engaged in creative work.

b) The preservation ethic considers nature special in itself. Nature, it is argued, has intrinsic
value or inherent worth beyond human appropriation. Preservationists have diverse reasons
for wanting to preserve nature. Some hold an almost religious belief regarding nature. They
have a reverence for life and respect the right of all creatures to live, no matter what the
social and economic costs.

c) The conservation or management ethic. It is a scientific preservationist view leaning on

the concept of sustainable development, where it recognizes the desire for decent living
standards, but must work towards a balance of resource use and resource availability. The
conservation ethic should strike a balance between total development and absolute
preservation. It emphasizes that rapid and uncontrolled growth in population and economics
is unsustainable and prone to fail in the long run. The goal of the conservation ethic is people
living altogether in one world indefinitely without depriving the future generation the
opportunity to meet its needs as well.

2.7 Relevant Environmental Attitudes and Behavior

a) Tragedy of the Commons. The worldview that the Earth, since time immemorial had
been able to sustain us led most of us to believe that its resources are easily replenished
and abundant enough for everyone to enjoy. This idea of commonly shared resources where
most are renewable had led to its overexploitation and eventual degradation, mainly due to
its open-access nature. Examples of these are the atmosphere, the open ocean and its
fishes. This phenomenon was first described in 1968 by economist/biologist Garret Hardin,
in an essay entitled the “Tragedy of the Commons”. Hardin explained that each user of a
shared common resource reasons that, “If I do not use this resource, someone else will”
or “a small amount used or pollute is not enough to matter, anyway, it’s a renewable
resource”.

9
 BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT

Environmental Science Module No. 2.0

This reasoning can be presumed to be logical if the number of users is small, assuming that
with such small impact, nature can indeed renew itself. However, the collective effect of many
users exploiting a shared resource can eventually degrade and exhaust it irreversibly and
consequently everyone suffers in the end. Thus, the shared resource or “commons” had met
its tragedy.

b) Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is a fundamental theory in psychology proposed by

Abraham Maslow in 1943, that can explain why poverty is a major contributing factor to many
environmental problems today. Poverty and environmental degradation are intertwined in a
vicious cycle, where insufferable circumstances leave poor people with no choice but to
engage in practices that have adverse impacts on the environment as they seek basic
provisions to improve their quality of life. A degraded environment creates less opportunities,
so poor people become more vulnerable in the process.

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is represented through a five-tier model of human needs,

arranged in hierarchical stages within a pyramid. Needs lower down in the hierarchy must
be satisfied first before individuals can attend to needs higher up. From the bottom of the
hierarchy upwards, the needs are: physiological, safety, love and belonging, esteem,
and self-actualization. Majority of the poor linger at the bottom of the pyramid, where their
primary concern is to satisfy their physiological needs in order to survive. This makes
environmental protection the least of their concerns. Only when one has achieved

self-actualization at the top of the pyramid would it open him to engage in altruistic endeavors
such as environmental protection.

c) Precautionary Principle. The precautionary principle or precautionary approach has its

origins in the early 1970s from the German principle 'Vorsorge', or foresight, based on the
belief that the society should exert efforts to avoid environmental damage by careful forward
planning. In environmental policy-making, it is a strategy to address environmental issues
with potential of harm while extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. It
emphasizes caution, pausing and reviewing before leaping into new innovations that may
prove disastrous. It is analogous to Benjamin Franklin’s axiom that “an ounce of prevention
is worth a pound of cure” and novelist Samuel Lover’s idiom “better safe than sorry”,
where it is wise to be careful and protect yourself against risk rather than be careless.
However, opponents to this approach takes it with a grain of salt, arguing that it is unscientific
and an obstacle to progress. In the issue of global warming, climate change skeptics use
the precautionary principle, where the lack of data to prove that anthropogenic greenhouse
gases (GHG) is the principal cause of climate change justifies the business-as-usual use
of fossil fuels unless data is sufficient enough to effect a reversal of lifestyle. But for climate
change advocates, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect
relationships are not fully established scientifically. In this context the proponent of an activity,
rather than the public, should bear the burden of proof.

10
 BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT

Environmental Science Module No. 2.0

2.8 Environmental Justice and Governance

Environmental justice is defined as fair treatment, meaning that “no group of people,
including racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic groups should bear a disproportionate
share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial,
municipal and commercial operations or the execution of national and local policies.”

Environmental justice is also interchangeably referred to as “environmental equity”,

defined as the equal protection against environmental hazards of all individuals, groups or
communities regardless of race, ethnicity, or economic status. The end goal of
environmental justice is fairness and speaks of the impartiality that should guide the
application of laws designed to protect the health of human beings and the productivity of
ecological systems on which all human activity, economic activity included, depends. The
following are relevant principles in the application of environmental justice:

a) Polluter-Pays Principle. This is one of the oldest principles of environmental law and also
one of the most intuitive, which traces its origins among the celebrated passages of the Greek
philosopher Plato in ‘The Dialogues of Plato’ which stated that, “If anyone intentionally
spoils the water of another…let him not only pay for damages, but purify the stream
or cistern which contains the water.” It makes practical and moral sense to make the
polluter pay for its wrongs and is expected to deter would-be polluters in the future. In the
interest of environmental justice, it seems fair that “if you make a mess, it is your duty to
clean it up”.

b) Intergenerational Equity. This principle is deeply rooted in various cultural and religious
traditions, built upon the use of equity. Initially formulated by the Greek philosopher Aristotle,
intergenerational equity serves as the guiding principle in international law for formulating
standards in allocating and sharing resources and for distributing the burdens of caring for
the resources and the environment in which they are found. The principle of intergenerational
equity became the foundation for the concept of sustainable development, during the 1987
UN World Commission on Environment and Development, contained in the Brundtland
Report which defined sustainable development as “meeting the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

c) Writ of Mandamus and Writ of Kalikasan. Article II Section 16 of the 1987 Constitution
provides that “The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced
and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.” This provision
was put to the ‘acid test” in the Oposa vs. Factoran Case, where the Supreme Court of the
Philippines, in a landmark decision on July 30, 1993 upheld the Doctrine of
Intergenerational Responsibility on the environment in Philippine jurisprudence. It was a
milestone case heralded not only in Philippine legal system but also in international
environmental law. Appalled by the state of the Philippine forest in which only 4% of the
country’s original 800,000 hectares remains in 1990, due to the government’s reckless
issuance of logging permits to logging concessionaires for an absurd 3.9 million hectares, an
area five time as much forest that actually exists, Attorney Oposa sued DENR Secretary

11
 BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT

Environmental Science Module No. 2.0

Fulgencio Factoran, acting on behalf of 43 children, including his own, and on behalf of
children not yet born. The plaintiffs demanded that all existing timber concessions be
cancelled, and that no new ones be issued. The lower court upheld the DENR’s position on
the grounds that people who didn’t yet exist had no right to sue. Upon appeal, the Supreme
Court ruled in favor of Oposa, where the high court agreed that “the rhythm and harmony of
nature” undoubtedly required the “management, renewal and conservation” of natural capital,
and imposed on each generation a responsibility to preserve nature for succeeding
generations. This is “intergenerational responsibility,”and became known as the “Oposa
Doctrine,” where its echoes can be heard in courtrooms around the world. This ushered in
a new era in legal jurisprudence, where, in another landmark case of Oposa vs MMDA, the
Supreme Court again ruled in favor of Oposa, issuing the Writ of Mandamus, which led to
the massive cleanup of Manila Bay. The writ is a legal instrument in the form of a court order
commanding a dilatory organization or individual, in this particular case, several government
agencies, to perform its legal duties and obligations, or be penalized for contempt of court.
Oposa also judiciously made use of another legal instrument unique to the Philippines, the
“Writ of Kalikasan” (“kalikasan” means “nature”), a court order which can be enforced to
deal swiftly with environmental threats affecting life, health, or property that may cover two
or more municipalities or provinces.

2.9 Key Takeaways

• Environmental science is the interdisciplinary study of the environment, incorporating

different fields of science, each with its respective approach in addressing various
environmental issues and problems, both on a local or global perspective.
• Ethics is a branch of philosophy which transcends all cultural and religious boundaries to
discern fundamentally what is right and what is wrong, while morals reflect the
predominant mindset of a society about ethical issues at a distinct time period.
• The ‘environmental principles’ that can serve as a guide on how society can establish its
harmonious relation with nature are interdependence and interconnectedness, change
and material cycles, law of limits and population dynamics, diversity and stability, balance
of nature and stewardship, and, the finiteness of resources.
• There are three primary theories of moral responsibility regarding the environment, all of
which supports environmental responsibility but whose approaches are different:
anthropocentric, biocentric and ecocentric.
• Many environmental attitudes about the environment, fall under one of three headings,
where each of these ethical positions has its own code of conduct against which
ecological morality may be measured: a) the development ethic, b) the preservation
ethic, c) the conservation ethic.

12
 BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT

Environmental Science Module No. 2.0

Available Books and E-resources:

• Enger ED and Simth BF. 2006. Environmental Science: A Study of Interrelationships.

10th Edition. McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
• Genesis 1:26. Holy Bible International Version
• Genesis 1:28. Holy Bible International Version
• Guzman RS and Guzman RZ. 2000. Environmental Education for Sustainable
Development. Wisdom Advocate Publishing
• Lee SJ and Añes ML. 2010. Lecture Notes in Environmental Science: The Economy of
Nature and Ecology of Man. 2nd edition. C&E Publishing Inc.
• Miller GT and Spoolman SE. 2013. Environmental Science. 14 th International Edition.
Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning.
• Robinson N. 1997. "Attaining Systems for Sustainability through Environmental Law".
Natural Resources & Environment. American Bar Association. 12 (2): 86–88, 140–141.
JSTOR 40924349
• Sluijs, J.P. & Turkenburg, W.C.. 2006. Climate Change and the Precautionary Principle.
Implementing the Precautionary Principle: Perspectives and Prospects.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/27704319_Climate_Change_and_the_Precaut
ionary_Principle
• Watson, Derrill. 2014. Poverty and Basic Needs. 10.1007/978-94-007-6167-4_442-1.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304077365_Poverty_and_Basic_Needs

13
 BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT

Environmental Science Module No. 2.0

FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT

ASSESSMENT TITLE Introduction and Overview of Environmental Science

ASSESSMENT TYPE Formative No. 1 Est.
Duration
OUTCOMES
ASSESSED

TOTAL POINTS GRADE

POINTS RECEIVED

INSTRUCTION:

This is an ESSAY type of assessment. Use the space below and the next page to write
something about yourself. Specifically, answer the following questions: (1) What sparked your
interest in studying Environmental Science? (2) What are the different environmental ethics
and attitudes would you advocate? (3) Are you living a life that conforms with all the
environmental principles in your learning journey as a student? Which of the principles do you
find challenging to follow? Explain.

14