18
Also other work in the context of water ethics supports this “anthropocentric
turn” and the rejection of romantic eco-belief. In particular, considerations of water
systems under the postulate of sustainable development (e.g. Parodi 2008 ; Lehn and
Parodi 2009 ) have unavoidably an anthropocentric focus because they are dealing
with human needs today and in future (WCED 1987 ; Grunwald and Kopfmüller
2012 ). In order to avoid misunderstanding: “anthropocentric” in this sense does not
imply taking the position of human dominion and complete control over nature. The
point here only is that the sustainability focus on human needs rejects fundamental
bio-centric positions (such as taken by Leopold 1949 ) and instead asks how to sustain ecosystems and their services and functions in order to sustain or improve the
possibilities of meeting human needs today and in the future.
Some sets of ethical principles have been proposed for water ethics (Groenfeldt
2013 ). The UNESCO ( 2011 , pp. 18ff) unfolds the normative dimension of water
ethics along a number of principles stemming partially from law and partially from
ethics:
• Principle of human dignity and the right to water
• Principle of equity in availability and applicability of water
• Principle of eco-centric ethics
• Principle of vicinity
• Principle of frugality
• Principle of transaction
• Principle of multiple and benefi cial use of water
• Principle of mandatory application of quantity and quality measures
• Principle of compensation and user pays
• Principle of polluter pays
• Principle of participation
• Principle of equitable and reasonable utilisation
This list seems to be comprehensive but might be perceived as confusing and
overladen. It could be used as a checklist to identify ethically relevant issues of a
water challenge under consideration and might thus have a heuristic function.
However, it is not clear in which way this list could be made operable to be used in
processes of deliberation and decision-making. What is missing in this respect is a
system of criteria of weighing these principles in case of confl ict, and a procedural
proposal how this could be done.
2.3.2 Subjects of Water Ethics
One of the major lessons learned when considering the existing work on water ethics is its subject. As has become clear the subject of water ethics is not – as many
people might expect – “water” as such but is human intervention into water systems
and cycles. Water itself is subject to life, to the economy, to religious thought and to
cultural attitudes. Ethics, however, always considers options how to act or to decide.
A. Grunwald
Also other work in the context of water ethics supports this “anthropocentric
turn” and the rejection of romantic eco-belief. In particular, considerations of water
systems under the postulate of sustainable development (e.g. Parodi 2008 ; Lehn and
Parodi 2009 ) have unavoidably an anthropocentric focus because they are dealing
with human needs today and in future (WCED 1987 ; Grunwald and Kopfmüller
2012 ). In order to avoid misunderstanding: “anthropocentric” in this sense does not
imply taking the position of human dominion and complete control over nature. The
point here only is that the sustainability focus on human needs rejects fundamental
bio-centric positions (such as taken by Leopold 1949 ) and instead asks how to sustain ecosystems and their services and functions in order to sustain or improve the
possibilities of meeting human needs today and in the future.
Some sets of ethical principles have been proposed for water ethics (Groenfeldt
2013 ). The UNESCO ( 2011 , pp. 18ff) unfolds the normative dimension of water
ethics along a number of principles stemming partially from law and partially from
ethics:
• Principle of human dignity and the right to water
• Principle of equity in availability and applicability of water
• Principle of eco-centric ethics
• Principle of vicinity
• Principle of frugality
• Principle of transaction
• Principle of multiple and benefi cial use of water
• Principle of mandatory application of quantity and quality measures
• Principle of compensation and user pays
• Principle of polluter pays
• Principle of participation
• Principle of equitable and reasonable utilisation
This list seems to be comprehensive but might be perceived as confusing and
overladen. It could be used as a checklist to identify ethically relevant issues of a
water challenge under consideration and might thus have a heuristic function.
However, it is not clear in which way this list could be made operable to be used in
processes of deliberation and decision-making. What is missing in this respect is a
system of criteria of weighing these principles in case of confl ict, and a procedural
proposal how this could be done.
2.3.2 Subjects of Water Ethics
One of the major lessons learned when considering the existing work on water ethics is its subject. As has become clear the subject of water ethics is not – as many
people might expect – “water” as such but is human intervention into water systems
and cycles. Water itself is subject to life, to the economy, to religious thought and to
cultural attitudes. Ethics, however, always considers options how to act or to decide.
A. Grunwald