Running head: CASE 2-1 WORLD BANK AND THE EXPORT OF POLLUTION 1

Case 2-1 World Bank and the Export of Pollution

Cheri Luster

Everest University

Case 2-1 World Bank and the Export of Pollution

My view supports the preference of preserving the wilderness over paving for profit, as

well as valuing quality of human life over irresponsibly dumping hazardous waste from rich

countries onto poor, undeveloped countries. It was arrogant of the World Bank spokes person

to propose that because that because this population may be “the least of these” they are

somehow less entitled to a healthy, opportunistic life. It devalues human life to put a price and

limit their rights that are given to us all and is a prime example of the dominant global economic

policies.

Pollution should not be exported to UDC’s. My question is who has the right to is

proposing such an immoral idea? If you arrive at a decision through a moral and logical process

it tips in favor of preserving life for all. It is immoral and unethical to feel entitled based on

power and profit. In working through the analytical process for moral resolution I considered the

moral standards, recognizing how benefits, harms, and rights are vary in their impact to society.

Looking at the benefits the company stands to significantly gain by cheaper disposal and

increasing their profits. The UDC’s gain is financially in the short term, but ultimately loose from

a health, environmental, and socially perspective. There is not an overall benefit for both parties

to have win outcome in this circumstance. Next, consider the Harms. There are many reasons

this is a poor proposal for instance the health, welfare, mortality, and environment will be

negatively impacted by exporting to their country. It harms this country irrevocably. Next,

consider the environment that is already undeveloped. It will suffer from the pollution effecting

the climate, ecosystem, and wildlife. The harm to this UDC is far too great to support this idea. It

is unjust and unfair and cannot from a moral, ethical, and logical standpoint be supported. The

people’s rights are being denied while the company and stakeholders rights are being

exercised. The outcome of the two parties is one who wins and one who loses and therefore

this is a moral problem. The government of this country has to protect its citizens and ethically

act in the best interest of the people. I propose that The World Bank invest in technology

solutions that are earth friendly to properly manage air pollution in their own country. They

should have to invest money into verified technologies that effectively manages pollution. This

would help to protect health and protect ecological resources by reducing or preventing

environmental risks. People would appreciate they are contributing to being environmentally

responsible verses picking a UDC to be the dumping ground for our pollution.

 

I support going green and using resources conservatively. Natural resources are not

everlasting therefore we should give back and use wisely. I do not support paving because of

convenience and profit. There is value in helping the environment. The ecosystem controls

climate, wildlife, and air quality. There is the possibility of erosion, and it could contribute to

global warming. To remove the natural existence and replacing with concrete we are doing an

injustice and unfair thing, as well as doing irreversible damage to the earth. Society’s attitudes

typically are to take away without replenishing what we use or to justify removal of vegetation for

the sake of profit or convenience. This case involves both profit and convenience. Chip Ward an

Environmentalist stated “Wilderness and roadless landscapes are the source of 80% of our

nation's freshwater, our lifeblood. They are also storehouses of precious biodiversity, key to the

viability and integrity of whole ecosystems. They provide critical habitat for endangered species

and are the last places where we can experience the disappearing landscape that shaped our

national character.” I believe that there should be boundaries that we maintain between man

and nature which seeks to respect and appreciate earth’s natural beauty. I do not believe in

putting a price on that.

Bibliography

Hosmer, L. T. (2008). The Management of Ethics (6th edition Ed.). New York, New York: McGraw-Hill

Irwin.

Ward, C. (2008, January 28). Tomgram: Paving the Wilderness [Newsgroup comment]. Retrieved from

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/1191/chip_ward_on_paving_the_wildernessenergyjustice.net.

(2007, October 31).

Fact Sheet: “Clean Coal” Power Plant (ICCG) [Newsgroup comment]. Retrieved from

http://www.energyjustice.net/coal/igcc/factsheet.pdf