Introduction
Littering involves improper disposal of waste products in public spaces. It is a significant concern to the environment for several reasons. This can be categorized in terms of its negative effect on human health, wildlife, the ecosystem and the overall well-being of communities. When waste products are disposed of, they contribute to the degradation of the visual appeal of urban areas and the natural landscape. This has both aesthetic and economic impacts that negatively impact local economies, property value, and tourism. The cost of clearing the litter also burdens the community around. Littering leads to pollution of the soil, the waterways, and even the air (Chaudhary, Polonsky, and McClaren 478). Litter ends up in rivers, lakes, and oceans and can break into small pieces, such as microplastics, which are associated with destroying aquatic life. It may also affect human health when it enters the food chain.
Some liter has harmful substances and chemicals that contaminate the soil, negatively affecting plant growth and the overall ecosystem health. Littering as part of air pollution poses health risks to humans and animals, especially when items such as rubber and plastic are burned. The destruction of the natural habitat leads to the disruption of the natural balance of ecosystems. There may be long-term environmental impacts, especially when littering is by particular plastic that takes very long to decompose. Littered areas are breeding grounds for pests and disease vectors which are associated with disease outbreaks.
Theories associated with Littering
Various theories can be used to explain littering as an environmental concern that requires public awareness, education, proper waste management systems, and enforcement of anti-littering laws and regulations. The morality theory identifies that humans, like animals, pursue pleasure and avoid pain. Consequently, littering is a mundane act that negatively affects the environment. Littering may then be classified as an individual choice that reverberates across ecosystems. It does not only affect the environment but also taps into the core of human morality. While littering stems from the pursuit of immediate convenience and pleasure, it blinds the person to the long-term effect of their actions (Schwartz and Inbar). They only see it as a quick solution to the inconvenience of holding onto the waste.
The morality theory also classifies littering as an act of avoiding discomfort at the individual level. In such a case, the person is disconnected from his or her action and discards the waste thoughtlessly. They are isolated from the environmental degradation associated with littering allowing them to prioritize personal ease over broader ecological concerns. Morality, in terms of littering, extends beyond human-centric considerations. Human beings need to encompass the well-being of other living beings as a moral framework (Zagzebski). Littering is associated with pain and suffering to wildlife in terms of disrupting the balance of the ecosystem and ingestion-related health issues. Accumulated litter created a shared negative effect on the overall society as it compromised public health. It means that personal choice has communal consequences.
Jeremy Bentham’s utilitarian theory identifies that the ultimate principle of morality is the “principle of utility” (Read). It means that social policies’ main goal is to achieve the best consequences for everyone involved. This theory helps to understand the profound impact of littering on an individual and the overall community due to the environmental concern it brings. Improper waste disposal has devastating effects on the environment that disrupts the ecosystem’s workings. Although an individual action, it has a negative effect on the whole community. According to utilitarian theory, the moral worth of an action is determined by its contribution to overall happiness or pleasure. Littering, in this context, causes displeasure for those who witness or are directly affected by it. Littering creates a net reduction in societal well-being.
Utilitarianism goes beyond to encompass non-human entities and emphasizes sentient beings. Littering is associated with harm and suffering to wildlife. For instance, plastic pollution leads to ingestion-related issues that decrease the overall happiness of wildlife and the natural world. Its economic impact minimizes overall happiness by deterring tourism, costly cleanups, and reduced property values. Economic losses redirect resources which could have improved utilitarianism. The utilitarian theory encourages a forward-looking approach, considering the long-term consequences of actions (Read). Littering poses a lasting threat to environmental harm. Addressing littering could promote a sustainable and harmonious relationship between the environment and society to maximize individual and community overall well-being.
Conclusion
By recognizing the negative consequences of littering on both human and environmental well-being, society can formulate policies and practices that align with the principle of utility. Littering affects the integrity of the environment and diminishes the overall well-being of I individuals and the community. The pursuit of short-term aesthetic pleasure through littering neglects the long-term environmental pain it inflicts. Understanding littering through the lens of the theory of natural human instincts emphasizes the moral dimensions for this behavior. The theories highlight the need for a collective shift in values. Addressing littering necessitates fostering an ethical framework that recognizes the inherent connection between personal actions and broader ecological consequences, ultimately promoting a harmonious coexistence between humans and the environment.
Works Cited
Chaudhary, Abdul Haseeb, Michael Jay Polonsky, and Nicholas McClaren. “Littering behaviour: A systematic review.” International Journal of Consumer Studies 45.4 (2021): 478-510.
Read, Daniel. “Experienced utility: utility theory from Jeremy Bentham to Daniel Kahneman.” Judgement and Choice: Perspectives on the Work of Daniel Kahneman. Psychology Press, 2020. 45-61.
Schwartz, Stephanie A., and Yoel Inbar. “Is it good to feel bad about littering? Conflict between moral beliefs and behaviors for everyday transgressions.” Cognition 236 (2023): 105437.
Zagzebski, Linda. Exemplarist moral theory. Oxford University Press, 2017.
write