The Mediterranean Sea provides habitat for a diverse assemblage of marine species, including 14 resident species of cetacean, 3 species of turtle and the Mediterranean monk seal. Surrounded by densely populated coastlines, marine megafauna in the region are exposed to multiple anthropogenic threats. Alongside a growing awareness of these threats, and national, EU and international legal frameworks to conserve these species and their habitats, there is increasing pressure to exploit hydrocarbon deposits in the region. The exploration and extraction of oil and gas require a precautionary approach to allow effective protection and, where possible, mitigation of impacts on marine life. This paper examines contentious case studies from the Mediterranean where best practice to mitigate harmful effects has not been followed. Even where these failings are not unequivocally in breach of legal obligations, they demonstrate unethical conduct. Recommendations to improve mitigation are presented, including the need to (1) adequately consider the propagation of impacts into local protected areas, (2) update impact assessments (including acoustic modelling) when planned activities change significantly, (3) make documents and timings public prior to starting harmful activities, (4) demonstrate that seismic survey operators are using the lowest possible source levels and number of shots to meet objectives, (5) provide stronger incentives for industry to invest in risk reduction (including a significant increase in financial responsibility), (6) ensure regulatory authorities establish that the relevant guidelines are being followed and (7) make survey reports summarising encounters with marine megafauna publicly accessible in a timely fashion.
This paper explores the compatibility between human autonomy and ecosophical thinking, in particular Arne Næss’s worldview. Contrary to the prevailing view that environmental ethics marginalizes autonomy due to its anti-anthropocentric roots, this paper argues that Næss’s concept of self-realization not only accommodates human autonomy but is foundational to it. Self-realization, understood as the fulfillment of the inherent capacities of every living being, is analyzed through philosophical traditions from Aristotle to Spinoza, emphasizing its dynamic interpretation. This paper highlights the role of identification—a process of recognizing kinship with other beings—as central to expanding the self while preserving individuality. This relational autonomy, called ‘ecological’ autonomy, underscores interdependence without erasing personal agency. By situating autonomy within ecological networks, this paper demonstrates that flourishing (self-realization) arises from acknowledging and nurturing these connections. Ultimately, Næss’s ecosophy redefines autonomy as inherently relational, offering a pathway for humans to thrive alongside nature. Self-realization, rooted in ontology rather than in ethics, fosters a harmonious coexistence where autonomy and ecological dependence coexist, challenging traditional dichotomies in environmental philosophy.
Several studies have investigated the portrayal of ecology and environmental management. Additionally, the impact of co-creation in research, policymaking, and social transformation has also been analyzed. However, there is a gap in understanding regarding the role of multisectoral dialogue in shaping climate change mitigation strategies. This research focuses on how multisectoral collaboration, using a dialogical approach, can be a strategic action for environmental mitigation. Using the example of the Manresa Pact 2022, this study explores how multisectoral, including interfaith, dynamics can foster mitigation of climate crises and contribute to building more resilient, sustainable, and inclusive cities. A communicative methodology was used, including participant observation throughout the meetings, 5 interviews, and document analysis. Interreligious dialogue fosters equitable collaboration with other key stakeholders as a tool for co-creating climate change solutions among diverse stakeholders—government entities, scientific communities, and religious groups—collaborating equitably to combine their strengths and address weaknesses.
In recent years, a growing number of studies have emphasized the importance of integrating ethics education into the school curriculum. The objective of the present study is to investigate the perspectives of educators on the teaching of bioethics in primary and secondary education in Greece. A survey was conducted using google.forms. Through the official websites of the Directorates of Primary and Secondary Education throughout Greece, the email addresses of schools were identified. The link to the questionnaire was sent to these email addresses and the director of each school was asked to forward it to his/her fellow teachers. A total of 1274 educators responded to the survey. We found that there is strong support for integrating bioethics education into both primary and secondary education, with a clear preference for incorporating it into existing courses rather than creating separate bioethics courses. The necessity of teaching bioethics is viewed as slightly more important in secondary education compared to primary education, reflecting the increased complexity and relevance of bioethical issues as students mature. This is the first large-scale survey in Greece to examine the views of teachers in primary and secondary schools on issues related to bioethics. The study supports the argument for the introduction of bioethics education in the early years of school life. This, however, requires the enhancement of teacher training programs in bioethics and the development of appropriate teaching materials and techniques for use at each level of education.
This article compares the outcomes of studies using the so-called Humans and Nature scale in The Netherlands and in Indonesia. The scale measures public support for policies that aim to address environmental challenges, conceptualizing and operationalizing 4 images of human-nature interaction, based on philosophy and religion. The scale was developed in The Netherlands, which is considered to be one of the most secularized countries in the world. It has been used in more than 12 countries, and recently in Indonesia, a country that is considered to be overwhelmingly religious, predominantly Muslim. The main research questions are whether religion matters when it comes to environment, and whether The Netherlands and Indonesia differ in this respect. The answers are relevant because in the environmentalism debate there is a tension between secular and religious environmentalists that does not facilitate a joint effort. The main finding is that humans primarily respond to environmental issues as humans, not as Muslims or Christians, Indonesians or Dutch, and that respondents of various backgrounds are united in their support for a view of humans as eco-friendly stewards of nature. However, this fundamental human attitude towards nature may be framed in religious language, if that language is available in a specific context. In a world where there seems to be a growing gap between the West and the Muslim world, yet a world which faces global environmental challenges, this outcome might be surprising and significant. It is good news for policy makers who foster collaboration between religions, religious and secular (non-religious) actors, and Westerners and non-Westerners in overcoming environmental challenges.
An unresolved and vital concern in the realm of environmental ethics is the moral accountability of humans towards nature. In this pursuit, we attempt to uncover insights from discussions related to postmodernism and decolonization that can facilitate the establishment of a transcultural environmental discourse within ethical deliberations. The primary objective is to embark on a quest for an ethical framework that harmoniously aligns human culture with the natural world and informs co-inhabitation. While exploring the moral implications of human integration within the ‘oikos,’ we aim to contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of human-nature interconnectedness. In the first section, we analyze Ricardo Rozzi’s interpretation of ‘bioculturalism,’ examining its theoretical underpinnings, core principles, structure, and implications for understanding nature-culture reciprocity. In the second section we expand the intercultural dialogue to explore the role of transcultural dialogue within bioculturalism. We evaluate the significance of transcultural bioculturalism for sustainable relationships between humans and the environment, i.e. nature-culture diversity.
Treating nature as a subject of law is a topic of contention in the contemporary era. A significant number of states, if not the majority, continue to refrain from recognising the protection of nature in this sense. This is because the essence of legal personality is attributed solely to individual or collective persons. However, some countries have already begun to approach environmental protection from the perspective of nature without being exclusively focused on human rights. This study is based on civil liability law in Portugal and seeks to verify the relevance of attributing legal personhood to nature. The research results indicate that the configuration of this instrument, which recognises the subjective rights of nature, could help improve environmental protection. However, it is not, in legal terms, the most appropriate way forward. From a human and non-human relational perspective, attributing a ‘status’ to nature may be preferable through existential heritage.
This article aims to analyze the perspective of the philosopher Hans Jonas with regard to the rights of animals to life. We will show how, according to Jonas, the ethical significance of animals emerges as they reveal nature’s vulnerability and underscore the moral duty of humans, whose responsibility intensifies as their capacity to cause harm increases. Within this framework, it is essential to recognize that (1) Jonas supports the criterion of maximum benefit when it comes to animal experimentation for scientific purposes; (2) his theory reflects a concern for the conditions of animals within the meat industry, advocating for moderation in consumption; and (3) his ethical approach is particularly focused on the protection of endangered animal species, a concern that has become increasingly urgent with the rise of new powers of technology. For Jonas, an ethical theory that seeks to address the challenge of species preservation must begin with a theoretical redefinition that acknowledges animals as ‘ends in themselves’, a shift that would necessitate a re-evaluation not only of ethics but also of underlying ontological and metaphysical assumptions. Finally, as we will discuss, Jonas’s ongoing debate on the rights of animals to life brings to the forefront the central concern of his ethics of responsibility: maintaining the balance of the cosmic whole against the destructive impact of human activity, which has led to the extinction of animal species with which humans share a ‘solidarity of interests’. It is within this context that Jonas’s stance on animal rights should be understood, and it is precisely here that his position stands out as both innovative and urgent in the defense of animal life.
In the 1970s, the discovery of the problem of the hole in the ozone layer represented a crucial milestone in the history of science and the environment. Scientists such as Mario Molina and F. Sherry Rowland revealed that chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), previously thought to be harmless, could destroy the ozone layer, leading to global awareness of environmental protection. However, they faced resistance from industry and misinformation. Confirmation of the problem came with Jonathan Shanklin’s work in Antarctica. The effects of ozone depletion, such as increased skin cancer, were documented, and humanity reacted with the Montreal Protocol, phasing out harmful substances. Furthermore, the link between the historical success of science-based environmental actions and the modern challenges posed by misinformation should be emphasized, especially considering the rise of digital platforms as both tools and threats to public understanding. Today, tackling disinformation in global environmental problems represents a substantial challenge, requiring science education, raising awareness on social media, valuing traditional sources, training in source verification, recognizing science as a reliable source, and tackling environmental challenges based on science. This article proposes actionable solutions such as integrating critical media literacy into education, establishing international regulations to curb disinformation, and leveraging collaborative platforms to promote accurate scientific communication. It argues that strengthening international cooperation, modeled on the Montreal Protocol, is crucial to countering misinformation and fostering effective global environmental policies. The history of the Montreal Protocol highlights the importance of science, international cooperation, and determined action in protecting the environment and human health.
