Virtue ethics judges the character and intentions of the person acting, consequentialist ethics judges outcomes, and rights-based ethics judges whether actions respect rights. These are the three approaches in HL.c Environmental ethics, an HL-only subtopic.
How the Three Approaches Work
Each framework asks a different question when deciding whether environmental behaviour is morally right.
| Ethical approach | Central question | Environmental application |
|---|---|---|
| Virtue ethics | What would a person of good character do? | A responsible farmer protects soil because stewardship is virtuous, even without legal or financial incentives. |
| Consequentialist ethics | Which action produces the best overall consequences? | A government restricts fishing when long-term ecological and social benefits outweigh short-term economic losses. |
| Rights-based ethics | Does the action respect relevant rights and duties? | A mine is rejected if it violates an Indigenous community's land and water rights, despite creating jobs. |
Virtue ethics focuses on qualities such as responsibility, restraint, compassion and respect. The morality of an action reflects the decision-maker's character.
Consequentialist ethics, including utilitarian ethics, compares expected benefits and harms. Defining the “best” outcome can be difficult because impacts may be uncertain, delayed or unevenly distributed, raising questions of environmental justice.
Rights-based ethics, also called deontological ethics, considers whether actions conflict with others' rights. Disagreement concerns which entities have rights or moral standing, such as humans, animals, ecosystems or future generations.
Commercial whaling could therefore be opposed because compassionate people avoid suffering, protection produces better ecological outcomes, or whales have a right not to be killed. The conclusion is similar, but the reasoning differs. The common misconception that these approaches must produce different decisions is therefore incorrect.
Exam Technique
In a compare and contrast response, apply all three approaches to the same named issue. For evaluate or discuss, weigh strengths and limitations, include stakeholder perspectives, and reach a supported judgement.
