The excerpt of a recent contribution posted on the No. 3 / 2008 of the magazine 'The Italian Administration':
Part of the latest economic and sociological literature [1] has emphasized the problems people created by the perverse effects in terms of further environmental degradation, and welfare, which may be associated with individual-level behaviors that are followed because they were considered by rational people, when they live in degraded or environmental contexts in urban areas where experience a high level of social risk.
This type of behavior by individuals is defined [2] as behavior that in such a context could help to increase personal well-being of the individual subject and at an aggregated level and comprehensive income, therefore, would have a negative impact on overall level of well-being of the community. This happens
because such activity would, in fact, a vicious spiral that makes you feel its negative effects on the same individual consumers who are encouraged to make use of certain goods or services to find on the market to try to blunt any negative effects on the quality of life caused by poor environmental conditions or the situation of unsafe cities.
use of such goods or services, it is argued [3] , would result in fact a further increase in the levels of environmental degradation and economic growth so defined, completely shareability, "undesirable" by specific studies on the subject.
As a result, it was said that economic growth would, in the short term, a weakening of the welfare levels of the community in terms of further environmental degradation.
In particular, the consumption of these goods would lead to negative economic effects imposed on populations and those that should be at the expense of the integrity of natural systems:
· water purifiers or air;
· mineral waters, which
· Tools help to protect people from hearing damage caused by urban traffic;
· medicines you are taking for the treatment of diseases caused by pollution of the atmosphere.
The list could be added all those individual and social problems that aggravate the conditions of existence of a significant number of people who, for different reasons, and not only cheap, they do not feel the need to peacefully coexist with the adverse effects of the destruction irreversible environmental (and, for example, the case of inconvenience to the court cases brought by the individual or interest groups affected by the situation of decay - such lawsuits are increasingly consuming, expensive and uncertain outcome - and this is the case with prejudice , that could be called a moral-existential, that people suffer when there is the inability to restore the state that many of the places for part of their existence they have known integrity, pleasant and healthy.
individuals, it is argued [4] , massive apply measures of self protection when living in areas affected by the cement and other forms of environmental depletion.
The degradation of the coast not far from large urban centers "can not justify expensive trips to areas contaminated by car or boat, or the purchase of vacation packages in some tropical paradise. To take advantage of assets that were previously available for free, individuals are forced to bear the costs " [5] .
Even more serious, however, is the circumstance in which those who is unable to bear these additional costs be affected directly, without in any way they can avoid the negative effects that result to all those who are not in a position to be able to enjoy an environment free of non-compromise in their leisure time and their holidays .
E 'hardly necessary to point out that these negative effects are caused by reasons of non-exclusively economic but also psychological, moral, medical, social, etc. ..
seems to say in short, is unlikely to be contradicted, that the continued implementation of "self-protective choices" [6] (due to human behavior, however, largely conscious, determine not only the depletion of natural heritage that should be available to all, but a logical consequence, the weakening of the security situation in the contemporary world) by the individual (which still does not seem sufficiently aware of the organizations that should address these issues) is at least partly the result of a purely hedonistic attitude.
We feel we should recall, to this point, the utilitarian theory of Jeremy Bentham, in which little importance is given to the sympathy and the importance of conscience, duty, justice and kindness towards others [7] .
Luigino Bruni argued that ' "Everyone, at least in the version of Bentham, is seen as a machine that maximizes utility, where utility is deeply rooted in a philosophy of hedonistic (pleasure) [...]. The happiness of Bentham can then be called psychological hedonism, individualism and a kind " [8] .
And this, in fact, it is: use a strongly individualistic and hedonistic, if not purely economic profit of the common resources, which is committed to the detriment of the natural heritage of course, what in fact has nothing to do with ' have environmental consciousness, sense of duty, kindness to others. The expression
"Undesirable economic growth" is thus presented as entirely consistent with the growing awareness today about the importance that environmental factors on the welfare of people.
This type of behavior by individuals is defined [2] as behavior that in such a context could help to increase personal well-being of the individual subject and at an aggregated level and comprehensive income, therefore, would have a negative impact on overall level of well-being of the community. This happens
because such activity would, in fact, a vicious spiral that makes you feel its negative effects on the same individual consumers who are encouraged to make use of certain goods or services to find on the market to try to blunt any negative effects on the quality of life caused by poor environmental conditions or the situation of unsafe cities.
use of such goods or services, it is argued [3] , would result in fact a further increase in the levels of environmental degradation and economic growth so defined, completely shareability, "undesirable" by specific studies on the subject.
As a result, it was said that economic growth would, in the short term, a weakening of the welfare levels of the community in terms of further environmental degradation.
In particular, the consumption of these goods would lead to negative economic effects imposed on populations and those that should be at the expense of the integrity of natural systems:
· water purifiers or air;
· mineral waters, which
· Tools help to protect people from hearing damage caused by urban traffic;
· medicines you are taking for the treatment of diseases caused by pollution of the atmosphere.
The list could be added all those individual and social problems that aggravate the conditions of existence of a significant number of people who, for different reasons, and not only cheap, they do not feel the need to peacefully coexist with the adverse effects of the destruction irreversible environmental (and, for example, the case of inconvenience to the court cases brought by the individual or interest groups affected by the situation of decay - such lawsuits are increasingly consuming, expensive and uncertain outcome - and this is the case with prejudice , that could be called a moral-existential, that people suffer when there is the inability to restore the state that many of the places for part of their existence they have known integrity, pleasant and healthy.
individuals, it is argued [4] , massive apply measures of self protection when living in areas affected by the cement and other forms of environmental depletion.
The degradation of the coast not far from large urban centers "can not justify expensive trips to areas contaminated by car or boat, or the purchase of vacation packages in some tropical paradise. To take advantage of assets that were previously available for free, individuals are forced to bear the costs " [5] .
Even more serious, however, is the circumstance in which those who is unable to bear these additional costs be affected directly, without in any way they can avoid the negative effects that result to all those who are not in a position to be able to enjoy an environment free of non-compromise in their leisure time and their holidays .
E 'hardly necessary to point out that these negative effects are caused by reasons of non-exclusively economic but also psychological, moral, medical, social, etc. ..
seems to say in short, is unlikely to be contradicted, that the continued implementation of "self-protective choices" [6] (due to human behavior, however, largely conscious, determine not only the depletion of natural heritage that should be available to all, but a logical consequence, the weakening of the security situation in the contemporary world) by the individual (which still does not seem sufficiently aware of the organizations that should address these issues) is at least partly the result of a purely hedonistic attitude.
We feel we should recall, to this point, the utilitarian theory of Jeremy Bentham, in which little importance is given to the sympathy and the importance of conscience, duty, justice and kindness towards others [7] .
Luigino Bruni argued that ' "Everyone, at least in the version of Bentham, is seen as a machine that maximizes utility, where utility is deeply rooted in a philosophy of hedonistic (pleasure) [...]. The happiness of Bentham can then be called psychological hedonism, individualism and a kind " [8] .
And this, in fact, it is: use a strongly individualistic and hedonistic, if not purely economic profit of the common resources, which is committed to the detriment of the natural heritage of course, what in fact has nothing to do with ' have environmental consciousness, sense of duty, kindness to others. The expression
"Undesirable economic growth" is thus presented as entirely consistent with the growing awareness today about the importance that environmental factors on the welfare of people.
* [1] It makes particular reference to the authors here, particularly sociologists, who are busy or dealing with hazardous conditions in which modern society is exposed, Ulrick Beck, Anthony Giddens, and others. Squidoo also an interesting article called several times during the course of this paper, Angelo Antoci, "Environmental degradation and economic growth undesirable" appeared on the No. 7, LXXX Year of The Bridge, July 2007, pp.54-65
[2] See A. Antoci, "Environmental degradation ..., op.cit. p.54
[3] See A. Antoci, "Environmental degradation ..., op.cit. p.54
[4] See A. Antoci, "Environmental degradation ..., op.cit. p.55
[5] Ibid
[6] Ibid
[7] See L. Bruni, economy, happiness, and others - a survey on goods and welfare, Rome 2004, p.133
[8] See L. Bruni, economics, happiness and the others ..., op.cit., P.154
*
John Graziano missing
0 comments:
Post a Comment