Environmental Ethical Reasoning: A Cohort Analysis

Beyond the level of organic material one must use for food and shelter in order to survive, the amount of natural resources one consumes is a matter of choice (Miller, 1994). Many people, especially the affluent ones, have chosen to consume natural resources at a rate that is unsustainable and, therefore, ethically questionable. The study of how ethically-based decisions about the environment are made is of extreme importance to the future health of the ecosystem. Swearingen (1989) developed an instrument based on Lawrence Kohlberg's (1978) model of moral development to test a subject's level of environmental ethical reasoning. This approach recognizes that because cognitive abilities become increasingly complex as humans develop, the propensity for principled is present to varying degrees depending on the person's level of development. A refined version was used to test two hundred and sixty-one subjects divided into age and education cohorts whether the instrument was capable of determining a subjects level of environmental ethical reasoning (EER). Results show that the instrument is reliable and capable of differentiating levels of EER between most of the different age and education cohorts. The study also found that many more of the subjects from some younger age cohorts are reasoning at a higher level than expected. The study found a significant difference between males and females EER (Males P-index mean =.6040 and females P-index mean =.6788). Finally, the study found that certain measures of prior exposure and education about the environment correlate with measures EER. The number of nights subjects spent in the wilderness in the last five years did not correlate significantly with measures of EER (F = 1.40; p <6). The number of nights subjects spent in the wilderness before they were 13 years of age does correlate positively with measures of EER (F = 1.93; p <4). The fact that subjects lived in the country or a small town did not correlate with measures of EER (F =.345; p <). Having been involved with organized camping or wilderness education training does correlate positively with measures EER (F = 19.84; p <00). And finally, the type of organization is irrelevant (F =.846: p <4).