Justice-based approaches to environmental harm - Environmental Harm: An Eco-justice Perspective - page 25

Box 1.3: value
• Extrinsic - for example, harm is measured in terms of human interests
mediated by what happens to the environment, animals and plants
• Intrinsic for example, harm is measured according to criteria that says that
certain things done to the environment and to animals and plants are
inherently bad

This assessment of 'worth' is partly dependent upon the scale at which
evaluation occurs (see Table 1.1). Is the focus on individual species
or entire eco-systems? Should value also be applied to individual
organisms, and if so, should this apply to every and all plants and
animals? Eco-systems incorporate the biotic (plants, animals) and the
abiotic (water, soil) that, arguably, have value in their own right as self-
maintaining and self-perpetuating systems. How does one determine
the relative value of an individual organism, a particular species and
overarching biotic communities, relative to each other?

table 1.1 Scale

Individuals
(for example…)

Particular species
(for example…)

Biotic community and abiotic
context (for example…)

person homo sapiens Arctic eco-systems

plant hemp grasslands eco-systems

animal apes mountain eco-systems

At the same time, harms to specific eco-systems threaten all within
them, human and nonhuman alike. Melting glaciers have implications
for future flows of fresh water, and thus affect many different biotic
communities in diverse territories and climates. Interconnection and
overlapping interests are as important to consider as discrete needs,
rights and concepts of justice.

Box 1.4: measuring harm
• Form of harm - for example, immediate and direct impact, indirect and diffuse
• Seriousness of harm - for example, injury, fatality
• Wider effects of harm - for example, spatial (local or transboundary), temporal
(short or long term)
• Characteristics of harm - for example, cumulative effects, specific incidents