lOMoAR cPSD| 24668432

+254792947610

SUS1501
Assignment 7
Semester 1
2024 (727168)
- DUE 22 April
2024
COMPLETE AND WELL OUTLINED ANSWERS

[Author name]
[Date]
 lOMoAR cPSD| 24668432

SUS1501 Assignment 7 Semester 1 2024 (727168) -

DUE 22 April 2024

PART A
I am going to start this assignment with a poignant quote from Albert Einstein:
“We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created
them”. (Einstein A., 1934)
Now that I have calculated my ecological footprint, I find that there is an interesting
situation that I have to deal with when it comes to unpacking my ethical thinking in this
assignment. I spend about 9 months of the year living and studying in Cape Town. While
I am in Cape Town, my ecological footprint is 5.7 gha, with a 9.3 tonnes/year CO2
emissions level. This is in stark contrast to the time I spend on my family’s farm in Eston,
Kwa-Zulu Natal. On the farm, my ecological footprint is 2.1 gha, with a 3.2 tonnes/year
CO2 emissions level.
Re-reading the “Sustainability” section in the learning units and looking at the UNDP HDI
in particular, I feel quite uneasy that when I am in Cape Town I have a “European”
ecological footprint. It starts to make me think about how easily we are influenced by the
people and environment surrounding us. When on the farm, it is easier to have an
ecological footprint closer to the global average because the norm is to recycle (lack of
municipal waste removal), grow one's own food and only travel to town when it is needed.
When living in a metropolis however, you are swept away by consumerism and things like
lattés and fast food are the order of the day. Even those who profess to be gluten-free
vegans purchase prepared meals that use many resources, particularly water. I was
shocked to see how much water goes into producing a kilogram of tomatoes, beef and
even soy. I am reminded by Kant's writings how unsustainable my ecological footprint is,
because if everyone on Earth lived the way that I live while in Cape Town, we would need
quite a handful of planets – and those are quite hard to find.

Part B

As Prof Eccles put it:

“Bottom line, if you are anthropocentric in your outlook, just make sure that
you don’t lose sight of your place in nature. Also bear in mind that an
anthropocentric viewpoint lacks a spiritual sense of awe, wonder and
gratitude towards the natural world.”

For exam pack with questions and answers, quality notes, assignments and
exam help:

email: musyokah11@gmail.com

WhatsApp: +254792947610
 lOMoAR cPSD| 24668432

This view is well-balanced, in the sense that it acknowledges our tendency

to be anthropocentric. There is nothing wrong with this. We live
(cosmologically speaking) on a rock that is floating through a rather hostile
environment. If we don’t put ourselves first, then who will? What I appreciate
though, is the acknowledgement of our place on this planet. We depend on
the planet more than it depends on us. If we are going to safeguard our
future, we need to safeguard the planet’s biodiversity. What I am saying in
the above arguments has come from contemplating what I do, and so I can
safely say that I do see an alignment.

The above is an extract from my submission in assignment 6. I feel that it distils my

viewpoint in that assignment, because the question here requires that I now (in light of
discovering my ecological footprint) critically reflect on the answers that I submitted in
assignment 6.

We have indeed discussed a lot of theory and values, but a defining factor in virtue ethics
is the taking of these ideas and actively living them. A peculiar realisation I have come to
is that I almost live two lives. When I am caught up in the rat-race of the city, it is very
easy to go along with all of the things that epitomise city-living: fast-food, fossilfuel-based
transport, high-rise buildings, simplified waste-removal, etc. It is only recently that the
water crisis in Cape Town has made people aware of the scarcity of water as a planetary
resource – yet there is still this mentality that “When I fly up to DBN/JHB I am going to
take such a long shower”. Being on the farm reminds me that I can actually take these
lofty values and practise them on a daily basis, with like-minded individuals. It is still
difficult for the average person living in the city to purchase organic, free-range food or
grow enough to feed themselves. The foods most readily-available are cheap and mass-
produced; but they consume a lot of resources. I personally have cut out beef and lamb,
due to their resource consumption. The quiz has definitely opened my eyes to the fact
that this is not enough. I can however say that the Cape Town water crisis has shown me
that people can actually take up measures to live sustainably – even if the motivation is
the fear of Day Zero and not necessarily an appreciation for virtue ethics and
conscientious rationality.

Part C

1. “It’s all in the outcome – Consequentialism”

Now this is where we get a little technical. I will start by giving the definition of
sustainability with which I am working.

“Sustainable development is a development that meets the needs of the present

without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
(WCED, 1987)
 lOMoAR cPSD| 24668432

As mentioned earlier, the generalised consequences of such a high ecological

footprint can only be described as apocalyptic. The planet is struggling to recycle
our waste outputs and continue the process of creating more mineral and energy
resources. I cannot argue that my ecological footprint would be for the maximum
good of the whole planet. However, I have at least proven to myself that I drastically
decrease my footprint when I am on the farm. The question is now how to bring
that with me into the city. Sustainability used to be the centre of a Venn diagram
with three intersecting circles: namely Economic Development, Socio-political
Well-being and Environmental Well-being. It used to be the case that when
economic growth steamed ahead, the environment would suffer. We now need to
be in a space in which each circle is concentric, so that when the economy grows;
the other two circles also grow. If we look back at assignment 3, a utilitarian may
argue that with 20 000 less poor children per year, the planet does not have to
support them and the future generations that they would have brought forth.
Though I see the logic, I think that it does little to decrease our total footprint to the
point that it maximises the good for the whole. The people we are letting die only
have a footprint of around 1.8 gha, while Americans and Europeans live
comparatively lavish lifestyles. Perhaps we should take a leaf out of the book of
the City of Cape Town. When people feel the pinch of scarcity, they change their
behaviour drastically. Even when we felt the pinch of Eskom's loadshedding, we
drastically reduced our electricity usage. Controlled rationing is not the prettiest
option, but the forced change in behaviour may bring a favourable outcome that
maximises the good of the whole.

2. “Fair's Fair – Distributive Justice”

My move from the city to the farm, as well as my evaluation of virtue ethics reminds
me of the following quote by Jerry Kohlberg:

“Around us there is a breakdown of values in business and government…It is the

fact that we are not willing to sacrifice for the ethics and values we profess. For an
ethic is not an ethic, and a value not a value, without some sacrifice for it,
something not taken, something not gained. We do it in exchange for a greater
good, for something worth more than just money or power and position.”

To evaluate my ecological footprint from the viewpoint of distributive justice is to

realise that we live in a country of two worlds. Urban areas strongly establish our
self-interest motive, while rural areas traditionally espouse conscientious
For exam pack with questions and answers, quality notes, assignments and
exam help:

email: musyokah11@gmail.com

WhatsApp: +254792947610
 lOMoAR cPSD| 24668432

rationality and Ubuntu. Our industrialisation has been very anthropocentric and this
has led to us having a political system founded upon contractual obligations. It is
the self-interest motive that motivates people to take advantage of the system. If
we go back to Rawls’ theory, he gives a principles-based framework with which I
can evaluate my ecological footprint. He defines a principle as a “general axiomatic
statement from which particular decisions are drawn by a deductive process of
reasoning”. (Rawls, J., 1999)

Of course we have the fair opportunity/difference principle as well as the equal

liberty principle. At the root of my high ecological footprint is self-interest and my
ability to take advantage of the privilege of living in Cape Town. I therefore need
to use the aforementioned to resolve these points. I think that my time on the farm
makes me realise that the concept of Ubuntu can help the rest of the urbanised
population be more cognizant of our intra- and inter-connectedness as a species.
This then means that we must find a process that changes our sociopolitical
system from one that is reliant on contractual obligations, to one that promotes
conscientious rationality; thus supporting sustainable development. If I were
behind the veil of ignorance, I would not choose my Cape Town lifestyle. This is
because I know that in choosing it, there would be positions left over that were
worse-off and there would be a chance that I could end up in those worseoff
positions. This worst-case scenario would incentivise all agents behind the veil to
divide the hectares up more-or-less equally, so that no one is severely
disadvantaged by the “lottery” once the veil is lifted. The same applies as I start to
think of future generations. The thought that my 5.7 gha consumption is degrading
the quality of life of my grandchildren should be enough to spark my awareness of
the way I am living. Looking at my ecological footprint through the perspective of
distributive justice, I can conclude that my situation is unsustainable and does not
adhere to Rawls’ principles. My movement from the farm to the city does nothing
to decrease inequality experienced by many in the country. Similarly, not every
citizen has access to the most basic liberties, even though they are enshrined in
the constitution. You can look at Rawls’ principles and say that it is not okay that I
have such a large ecological footprint, and I agree. Going back to the farm gives
me an opportunity to take stock of that lifestyle and align my practices with my
values.

More aligned to the question is the point of distributive justice for our children.
Redistributing the global ecological footprint is a step that is going to make sure
that our children have a chance in this world. Some may call for a drastic drop in
consumption by the middle-class and above, or the proliferation of technology.
However, we see from Jevons' work that this brings it's own problems.
 lOMoAR cPSD| 24668432

“The profits of the trade will increase, new capital will be attracted, the price of
[goods] will fall, but the demand for it will increase; and eventually the greater
number of [goods] will more than make up for the diminished consumption of
each”. (Jevons, 1865, p 124-125)

If we carry on as we do, our children will come out from behind the veil and equally
be dealt the worst cards; condemned to live in a polluted and dying world. Some
greedy individuals may not care for their distant generations, but there is
something in the human gene that pushes for the survival of off-spring. Super
storms that are already occurring today are a constant reminder that global
warming is not something that is a thousand years away.

3. “Greenies – Environmental Ethics”

As I have mentioned before, the anthropocentric industrialisation of the 19 th century

has caused a lot of ecological damage. What is peculiar is that we are this planet's
sentient species. This means that (as far as we know) we are the only ones who
can appreciate intrinsic value in nature. I would be lying that we are close to having
an eco-centric view of nature, but we are more likely to appreciate that the
biodiversity of nature is what has helped us evolve; it is that which is sustaining us;
and it is going to be the key to our survival in the future. This assignment is centred
around the question of living sustainably so that our descendants may also live
good lives. I have taken the time to be honest with myself and say “I know that I
am anthropocentric in my thinking; but my survival and the survival of my bloodline
is dependent on nature. And nature needs us to live sustainably so that it can
survive.”

Apocalyptic scenarios are no longer thousands of years ago. We pollute, live with
short-term memory and think that it is the job of distant generations to deal with
global warming. However, we are already seeing the effects of our unsustainable
living. Whether you look through the perspective of distributive justice, egoism,
Pareto's utilitarianism or deontological theories, there is no running away from the
fact that an ecological footprint of 5.7 gha is simply unsustainable.

References:

1. Albert Einstein Quotes, BrainyQuote.com, viewed 8th April 2018, from

https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/albert_einstein_385842
2. Rawls, J., 1999, 'The Law of Peoples and International Political Theory', Wiley,
Hoboken, New Jersey
3. WCED Brüntland Commission, 1987, 'Our Common Future', Oxford University
Press, Stockholm, Sweden
For exam pack with questions and answers, quality notes, assignments and
exam help:

email: musyokah11@gmail.com

WhatsApp: +254792947610
 lOMoAR cPSD| 24668432

4. Jevons, W., 1865, 'The Coal Question: An Inquiry Concerning the Progress of the
Nation and the Probable Exhaustion of our Coal Mines', 3rd edition revised by
A.W. Flux, 1965, Augustus M. Kelley, New York

DISCLAIMER: THE ABOVE ASSIGNMENT MIGHT BE DOWNLOADED BY

MULTIPLE STUDENTS, NOT ADVISABLE TO SUBMIT DIRECT!!

For exam pack with questions and answers, quality notes, assignments and
exam help:

email: musyokah11@gmail.com

WhatsApp: +254792947610