Landfill Expansion and its Ethical Dimensions

As time evolves and we continue to produce more waste, we are subsequently running out of room for this garbage. Large waste removal industries have found solutions for this issue, but unsurprisingly, residential communities are not happy about it. Plans have yet to be finalized as to whether the current landfill in the Californian city Simi Valley will be expanded or not, but it is obvious that the majority of the reasoning behind this delay comes from the various potential impacts (including economical and environmental). The article “Concerns over landfill expansion bubbling up”, (October 2009) by Carissa Marsh describes the opposing viewpoints of the argument and how the impacts, both positive and negative, affect each party.

When analysing this specific situation, it is important to differentiate who or what counts morally, therefore leading to the demarcation problem. Of course this is not a simple question, considering there are three main conflicting groups with three contrasting views. The garbage company who is heading the expansion believes that it is humans who count morally. By increasing the size of the landfill, more jobs will arise, more money will be made, and humans will still have a place to dispose of their garbage. In their mind, these benefits outweigh the other opposing negative impacts, creating an anthropocentric view point. The local residential members living within the area of the proposed landfill also have taken a stand which is human morally based, but for the opposite reasons. They believe the landfill augmentation will hurt their community’s overall happiness in terms of increased traffic, visual impacts, and odours. The remaining group is environmentally based and believes that the health and the well-being of the environment is what morally count, leading to a biocentric holistic perspective. The addition of the land fill will cause an increase in pollution and destruction of land.

After distinguishing the various morals involved in this argument, an ethical decision has the potential to be made. Unfortunately this will not come easy seeing that there are two “schools” of ethical theory. From a consequentialist point of view, the decision would be based on likely outcomes, and more specifically how many people would benefit from the existence or non-existence of the expanded landfill. If the plans for the landfill were to go through, humans would benefit economically. More workers would be needed to run the site and to transport the garbage. Also, the waste removal industry itself would be increasing their profit. Lastly, humans would temporarily have no need to worry about not having a place for their waste. On the other end of the spectrum, if plans for the landfill were ceased, residents would not be succumbed to increased truck traffic and wear and tear on the highway, the aesthetics of their community would not be compromised, and there would be no unwanted odours.

From a non-consequentialist’s viewpoint, the rights of the parties involved have to be considered. The locals have the right to a happy and healthy life, which includes a positive visual image of their neighbourhood and prevention of pollution due to an increase in truck traffic. In comparison, the operators of the company who are in favour of the expansion also have the right to allow their business to prosper. Another set of rights that need to be taken into consideration are those of future generations. They are entitled to a clean and healthy planet and environmentalists argue that the transportation and burying of garbage included in this hypothetical landfill would prevent this.

By exploring the different ethical dimensions implied by the author, it is evident that a lot has to be taken into consideration when making an ethical decision. When determining whether or not continuation of this landfill expansion should be allowed, not only does the demarcation problem come into effect, consesquetialism versus non-consequentialism views play a major role as well.

Reference
Marsh, C. (2009) Concerns over landfill expansion bubbling. 23 October 2009. http://www.simivalleyacorn.com/news/2009-10-23/Front_Page/Concerns_over_landfill_expansion_bubbling_up.html. Accessed 2 November 2009.