I often get email from people who are really concerned about an aspect of a product that otherwise seems very environmentally friendly. It's great to see that sort of awareness, but the danger is that the minefields we encounter and attempt to navigate in trying to locate truly green products can be so daunting that we throw our hands up in the air and think "what's the point".
This is where the concept of transitional ethics can save the day.
It seems that term originated with the permaculture movement, which is all about self sufficiency and a reduction on reliance on industrial systems of production.
However, how do you get from point A (total reliance) to point B (self sufficiency)? It's usually not in one fell swoop; there has to be some tradeoffs along the way if only for a short time or to reach a greater goal.
It took generations for us to get to this point where so much in our lives is toxic to the planet, and there's no on/off green switch we can flick to reverse that - unless you have a ton of cash and time of course!
As an example of transitional ethics, the dam on my property was in bad repair. If it ever rains again, it was in danger of collapsing.
To fix the dam, I could have spent the next year manually shoring it up in my spare time using a shovel and wheelbarrow. I decided to arrange for a bulldozer that fixed it up in under an hour. As I sat and watched the 50 year old dozer belch smoke and rip the surrounding area up as it went about its task, I had an attack of the guilts - but thinking more about it, it was still the right choice.
The state of the dam was not only a safety issue, but a collapse would have seen the precious water escape (this is a really dry area), caused major erosion and a ton of slow growing trees bowled over in the process.
A manual repair may not have ever occurred in time or been good enough. Now if it ever does rain heavily again, there will be 600,000 gallons of water available not just for my use, meaning I won't have to manually bring water in, but for the local wildlife - I just can't spare a drop for the local fauna at the moment. That time I would have spent on a manual repair can also now be put into other aspects of my green goals.
Here's a few more examples of where transitional ethics come into play:
- driving your car to the garden supplies store to pick up vegetable seeds so you don't have to buy so much factory farm produce from the supermarket and to reduce overall food miles.
- installing a plastic rain barrel to catch rainwater
- buying solar panels to help reduce the amount of mains electricity you use
- buying a new refrigerator to replace the old one which is still in good working order, but chews juice like there's no tomorrow.
- Having a pack of disposable diapers for your baby for emergencies
- travelling to take a course in self sufficiency!
.. all the above have environmentally "unfriendly" components, but the end goal more than offsets any damage caused.
Transitional ethics vs. rationalization
Transitional ethics shouldn't be confused with rationalization. Rationalization is where you find justification for things you know are decidedly "ungreen". For example, I'm a meat eater - something that's certainly not good for the environment. A rationalization I could use is that vegetables these days are laced with pesticides and other nasties and I only grass fed beef anyway. That just doesn't cut it and I need to reduce my meat consumption.
I guess the bottom line is, when you're in a moral dilemma about a purchase or course of action and how it will affect the environment, don't sweat the small stuff too much or bother about the "greener than thou" brigade or the eco-police. Think about the big picture, think transitional ethics; i.e. does the end justify the means? Transitional ethics does not mean selling out, it's just being realistic.
