Search results

This article aims to analyze the anthropocentrism vs ethics of care positions of a group of undergraduate students at a private university in Mexico to test gender variable differences in their perspectives. There are two hypotheses: (1) there is a statistically significant difference between male and female genders related to anthropocentrism vs ethics of care positions, and if so, (2) the differences are attributable to women having a more ethics of care position than men. Participants were 561 undergraduate students from a private university in Mexico (257 female, 304 male). The findings demonstrated that both hypotheses were supported by the ethics of care, where the individual rights perspective is set aside to seek collective and holistic well-being.

T-tests were performed to test gender differences in anthropocentrism and ethics of care.

The results showed statistical differences based on gender (sig.000) and that women are less anthropocentric (or more oriented toward an ethics of care than men (female:1.64 and male:1.94). Ethics of care of female position is more defined than that of men. As a conclusion, men are more oriented to anthropocentrism, which reflects a lack of environmental connection by not assuming themselves as part of it and by defending the right of resources exploitation. On the contrary, women tend to respond from an ethic of care that means a more harmonious relationship with nature. In addition, women tend to assume a relationship with the environment, without hierarchy or supremacy towards it, and tend to reject the demand for the exploitation of the planet's resources as part of a right that human beings have historically assumed.

One of the limitations of this study is that it has been carried out in a university educational context with exclusively undergraduate students. It would be interesting to validate these anthropocentric vs ethics of care positions in different university groups, including professors and academic managers. Studying this concept in diverse contexts such as business, government and civil society would also be engaging. In addition, the authors recognize that the study is limited by its small population, which means that a balance between men and women or disciplines could not be guaranteed. However, the authors believe that although the results may not be considered exhaustive or conclusive, the results shed light for possible new studies in which the population is expanded. This is an exploratory study.

These results have practical implications for universities. In the classroom and in the university environment, students can learn to question the way they relate to the environment. Anthropocentrism (more accentuated in men) is assumed to be separate from the environment and with the right to its exploitation. Contrary to anthropocentrism, it is necessary to explore other positions such as the ethics of care or feminine ethics, more pronounced in women. Universities can develop environmental sustainability projects under the leadership of women, without claiming to be exclusive to them. In this way, the ethic of care approach can be put into practice and thus begin the necessary change for a new environmental relationship perspective.

Universities are required to provide an educational orientation towards Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) particularly those that respond to the climate crisis. To this end, it is necessary to promote a new environmental awareness that critically question anthropocentric models based on the supremacy over the environment. The ethics of care or feminine ethics, contrary to the previous position, assumes that the person is part of the environment and is oriented to its care and healing of the damage caused to restore this network of the human being with nature. The originality of this study lies in demonstrating how women exhibit a different relationship with the environment, oriented to the ethics of care, and how their posture shows a difference with anthropocentrism, which is stronger in men.

This chapter argues that environmental ethicists commit a serious error when they require that people hold a moral realist metaethical belief in the intrinsic value of non-human living things and non-living natural things in order to be able to behave in an ethically acceptable manner toward the environment.

Environmental ethics regard this position as the mandatory non-anthropocentrism one must first hold in order to be in a proper moral relationship to the environment. The main reason for seeing this requirement as an error is that it is politically unrealistic insofar most people most of the time behave in political contexts on the basis of instrumental and not intrinsic reasons. To claim that people can behave in a morally acceptable manner toward the environment if and only if they first believe in its intrinsic value is not only politically unrealistic, but also actually false.

The chapter looks at recent studies measuring the behavior of political and moral philosophers which shows that they do not behave in any markedly way better than non-moral philosophers. Ethicists, whom one can assume believe in some form or another of the mind-independent reality of moral properties, are not more morally well-behaved for holding such a belief.

Ethicists, especially environmental ethicists, are in no position to require of us to believe in the intrinsic value of the environment in order to behave in more beneficial ways toward it.

This study aims to raises the question of the potential impact of posthumanism, a stream in contemporary postmodernist philosophy, on current tourism practices and tourism studies. The author discusses its denial of some basic positions of enlightenment humanism: human exceptionalism, anthropocentrism and transcendentalism. The author then seeks to infer the implications of posthumanist thought for the basic concepts and categorical distinctions on which modern tourism and modernist tourist studies are based.

This paper raises the question of the potential impact of posthumanism, a stream in contemporary postmodernist philosophy, on current tourism practices and tourism studies. The author discusses its denial of some basic positions of Enlightenment humanism: human exceptionalism, anthropocentrism and transcendentalism. The author then seeks to infer the implications of posthumanist thought for the basic concepts and categorical distinctions on which modern tourism and modernist tourist studies are based. This paper raises the question of the potential impact of posthumanism, a stream in contemporary postmodernist philosophy, on current tourism practices and tourism studies. The author discusses its denial of some basic positions of Enlightenment humanism: human exceptionalism, anthropocentrism and transcendentalism. The author then seeks to infer the implications of posthumanist thought for the basic concepts and categorical distinctions on which modern tourism and modernist tourist studies are based. The author then discusses some inconsistencies in posthumanist philosophy, which stand in the way of its applicability to touristic practices, and end up with an appraisal of the significance of posthumanism for tourism studies.

The author pays specific attention to the implications of the effort of posthumanism to erase the human-animal divide for tourist-animal interaction, and of the possible impact of the adoption of posthumanist practices on the tourist industry and the ecological balance of wilderness areas. The author then discusses some inconsistencies in posthumanist philosophy, which stand in the way of its applicability to touristic practices, and end up with a brief appraisal of the significance of posthumanism for tourism studies.

This is the first attempt to confront tourism studies with the radical implications of posthumanist thought. It will hopefully open a new line of discourse in the field.

Argues that the philosophical debate in marketing, led by Shelby Hunt and Paul Anderson, is no longer providing new insights and is symptomatic of the anthropocentrism of the social sciences. This anthropocentrism has had consequent implications for meta‐theoretical frameworks that describe the field and has limited the breadth of philosophical discussion in marketing. Also argues that this discussion should now move beyond the subject‐object debate and identifies writers who have variously tried to transcend the paradigm. Argues that the debate should move from epistemological to ontological and metaphysical issues and that marketing′s philosophical discussion should also be broadened to include debate on aesthetics, theology and technology.

Drawing on the upper echelons theory, the study examines the effects of environmental attitudes of hotel managers on the waste management practices of small hotels in the context of a developing country.

A survey involving 246 managers of small hotels in the Accra Metropolitan Area was undertaken using a questionnaire that was based on the Waste Management Hierarchy and the revised New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) scales.

Results of the study showed that environmental attitudes of managers significantly influence the waste management practices of hotels, specifically, the anti-anthropocentricism, anti-exceptionalism, eco-crisis and balance-of-nature dimensions of the NEP scale. The study also found that all the environmental attitude dimensions had more significant effects on the waste disposal option because usually in developing countries, small hotels by their nature are more predisposed to undertaking this option.

Future studies should use longitudinal data to make causal inferences and consider the use of a rigorous statistical test such as common latent factor analysis.

Waste management problems in small hotels require softer sustainability strategies geared towards creating environmental awareness and inculcating the right environmental values in hotel managers in order to change the way managers view the environment.

Results of the study indicate that in the context of small hotels in developing countries, managers with eco-centric attitudes are more likely to engage in less expensive waste management practices rather than the most environmentally-friendly options.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) identifies building and development, a major corollary of population growth and urbanization, as the number one primary threat to the conservation of heritage sites worldwide. With efforts at conserving these sites focussing on anthropocentrism and ecocentrism, this study introduces and examines the role of the traditional African religion as a conservation strategy using the Osun-Osogbo grove in Nigeria as a case study.

Satellite imageries of the grove and surrounding areas were analysed for land-use and land cover change using Geographic Information Systems (GISs). A review of documentary evidence and key-informant interviews were also carried out on the state of the grove and how religious beliefs impact same.

Results showed that between 1986 and 2017, vegetal covers decreased by 77.1% while built-up areas grew by 342.4%. Despite the phenomenal rate of urbanization in the study area, the grove remained largely intact and even recorded a marginal increase in its vegetal cover and plant species. Qualitative data revealed that the fear of the religious taboos associated with the resident goddess of the grove, rather than a moral responsibility to the environment, was responsible for these outcomes.

The application of remote sensing and GIS in a transdisciplinary study of cultural heritage makes the work novel and contributes to the methodological approaches for such studies. The findings also show the potency of religion in environmental and cultural conservation.

The built environment is responsible for around half of total greenhouse gas emissions and the majority of emissions are produced during building lifecycles. As such the property sector has considerable potential to reduce lifecycle emissions and can contribute in mitigating global warming. However our existing conceptual understanding of sustainability is variable to the point of being disjointed and ambiguous and this could imply our efforts to realise reductions may not reach their potential. This paper seeks to address these issues.

Adopting a qualitative paradigm, this study used published information on property company websites regarding sustainability in a content analysis to address the questions: What is the conceptual understanding of sustainability within the ten leading Australian property firms? and What is the implication of this level of conceptual understanding with regards to delivering sustainability?

There are distinct differences between the conceptual understanding of sustainability within the firms, indicating a different worldview exists across these firms. It is probable that this information is published without a conscious decision to represent a technocentric or ecocentric worldview, and as such it reflects the lack of breadth and depth of understanding in the current discourse regarding sustainable development in some property firms. Some elements of the sustainability discourse are omitted from their conceptual understanding. Academics have a responsibility and an opportunity to widen the discourse so that current and future generations are able to make informed decisions in respect of the degree of sustainability it is necessary to adopt.

The limitation of a content analysis approach is that there is no opportunity to explore the underlying reasons for what is found. Thus the researcher is unable to ascertain whether omissions regarding the discourse of sustainability issues are conscious or sub‐conscious.

There is now a growing body of work around property and sustainability. Most of this work is focused on ways in which to implement sustainability or how sustainability is being integrated in the built environment. Little work is centred on the fundamentals of sustainability and understanding of the principles and how this impacts on the degree of sustainability practiced by those firms. The underlying hypothesis is that a weak conceptual understanding will only ever deliver weak sustainability at best. Weak sustainability is insufficient to avert the project climate change outcomes forecast by the United Nations.