32
cloud distributional and equity issues of who gets the benefits and who suffers the
losses, by arguing that in theory those benefiting could compensate the losers ensuring that no one is worse off (Pareto criterion) (Pearce 2002).
According to neoclassical economics, the environment can be priced because the
option and existence of values can be translated into the preferences of individuals
and those preferences in turn can be measured. However, individual preferences are
shaped to a large extent by the information available to people about the consequences of their choices (Beder 2011). Economic logic is that individuals act to
optimise their own interests, and Daly and Cobb (1989) marked ‘the intelligent
pursuit of private gain’ as the essence of rationality. If this is the principle behind the
market system, then altruistic behaviour is rational. The assumption that there is no
common good outside of individual wants and preferences leads to the idea that
markets satisfy needs of people more efficiently than governments. It is contrary to
interdisciplinary knowledge about people’s motivations and political behaviour.
When people act politically and vote, they often see themselves as part of a group.
They are not only concerned about their self-interest, but they also consider the
‘good of society’ (Self 1990, p. 9). Cao’s definition of Environmental Citizenship
includes not only membership in a group (humanity and earthlings) but also rights
(clean air and water), responsibilities (not to pollute) and means of learning (education and awareness campaigns) (Cao 2018, p. 14). Individuals could effectively
reveal their Environmental Citizenship in local communities’ actions. The encyclical Laudato si’ introduces an example where local cooperatives are being developed
to exploit renewable sources of energy, which ensure local self-sufficiency and even
the sale of surplus energy. The encyclical explains that if the existing world order
proves powerless to assume its responsibilities, local individuals and groups can
make a real difference. Corruption causes inadequate law enforcement, and therefore public pressure has to be exerted in order to bring about decisive political
action. Unless citizens control political power – national, regional and municipal –
it will be impossible to control damage to the environment (Francis 2015, p. 131).
People as consumers seek to maximise their own materialistic wants, whilst as citizens they are concerned with what constitutes a ‘good society” (Cooper and Hart
1992, p. 22).
Dealing with the state of environment in relation to human economic activity, the
environmental economist Field (1994) evolved the answers on the request – Why do
people behave in an environmentally inappropriate way? Is it a question of unethical
or immoral human behaviour that causes environmental degradation? If people lack
the moral and ethical strength to refrain such type of behaviour, we need to increase
the general level of environmental morality in the society – the role of education.
Furthermore, if the approach is strictly based on the moral argument, it means that
people pollute because they are morally underdeveloped in some way. Field states
that this is the way the economic system is arranged, and it is the precondition for
human behaviour. Another approach is the setting of economic system and its institutions and the decision-making processes that result in environmental degradation.
If people pollute because it is the most economical (cheapest) way to manage their
households or businesses, it is also an issue of certain institutional setting (whether
V. Kaputa et al.
cloud distributional and equity issues of who gets the benefits and who suffers the
losses, by arguing that in theory those benefiting could compensate the losers ensuring that no one is worse off (Pareto criterion) (Pearce 2002).
According to neoclassical economics, the environment can be priced because the
option and existence of values can be translated into the preferences of individuals
and those preferences in turn can be measured. However, individual preferences are
shaped to a large extent by the information available to people about the consequences of their choices (Beder 2011). Economic logic is that individuals act to
optimise their own interests, and Daly and Cobb (1989) marked ‘the intelligent
pursuit of private gain’ as the essence of rationality. If this is the principle behind the
market system, then altruistic behaviour is rational. The assumption that there is no
common good outside of individual wants and preferences leads to the idea that
markets satisfy needs of people more efficiently than governments. It is contrary to
interdisciplinary knowledge about people’s motivations and political behaviour.
When people act politically and vote, they often see themselves as part of a group.
They are not only concerned about their self-interest, but they also consider the
‘good of society’ (Self 1990, p. 9). Cao’s definition of Environmental Citizenship
includes not only membership in a group (humanity and earthlings) but also rights
(clean air and water), responsibilities (not to pollute) and means of learning (education and awareness campaigns) (Cao 2018, p. 14). Individuals could effectively
reveal their Environmental Citizenship in local communities’ actions. The encyclical Laudato si’ introduces an example where local cooperatives are being developed
to exploit renewable sources of energy, which ensure local self-sufficiency and even
the sale of surplus energy. The encyclical explains that if the existing world order
proves powerless to assume its responsibilities, local individuals and groups can
make a real difference. Corruption causes inadequate law enforcement, and therefore public pressure has to be exerted in order to bring about decisive political
action. Unless citizens control political power – national, regional and municipal –
it will be impossible to control damage to the environment (Francis 2015, p. 131).
People as consumers seek to maximise their own materialistic wants, whilst as citizens they are concerned with what constitutes a ‘good society” (Cooper and Hart
1992, p. 22).
Dealing with the state of environment in relation to human economic activity, the
environmental economist Field (1994) evolved the answers on the request – Why do
people behave in an environmentally inappropriate way? Is it a question of unethical
or immoral human behaviour that causes environmental degradation? If people lack
the moral and ethical strength to refrain such type of behaviour, we need to increase
the general level of environmental morality in the society – the role of education.
Furthermore, if the approach is strictly based on the moral argument, it means that
people pollute because they are morally underdeveloped in some way. Field states
that this is the way the economic system is arranged, and it is the precondition for
human behaviour. Another approach is the setting of economic system and its institutions and the decision-making processes that result in environmental degradation.
If people pollute because it is the most economical (cheapest) way to manage their
households or businesses, it is also an issue of certain institutional setting (whether
V. Kaputa et al.