ENERGY ETHICS AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: SUFFICIENCY & RESPONSIBILITY Anu Ramaswami Denny Chair Professor of Science, Technology & Public Policy, Humphrey School of Public Affairs & Professor of Engineering, University of Minnesota (UMN) Director, IGERT: Sustainable Urban Infrastructure Center for Sustainable Infrastructure Systems, UC Denver (Adjoint) University of Minnesota

Broadly Inter-Disciplinary IGERT: Sustainable Urban Infrastructure Two Ethics Modules Integrated in Core Courses

 Introductory Course: Module 1 - What is Development?  Discuss the goal of development before discussing sustainable development Amartya Sen – Human Capabilities Approach vs Peter Gleick (Basic Needs of 50 L water/pp/day) vs Utilitarian Approach (human labor as a means of development)  Origins of Human Development Index (HDI)  Fukuda-Parr, S; ‘The Human Development Paradigm: Operationalizing Sen’s Ideas on Capabilities’ Feminist Economics 9(2 – 3), 2003, 301 – 317, Module 1: What is Human Development?; Then discuss Energy needs

Review Table from Fukuda-Parr, 2002

Case Study: Is More Energy Use Per Capita a requirement for “development”? HDI vs Primary Energy Use/Capita From: Steinberger & Roberts 2009

Deliberations  Explore trends in energy use (per capita) and the HDI in different nations.  Can society articulate a minimum basic level of energy use for human survival as has been suggested for water? Should this basic energy use level be established as a universal human right?  How much energy use is enough for an improved quality of life? This discussion introduces the notion of sufficiency that is important in discussions about sustainability.  Follow up with a discussion that compares three different paradigms for human development (Basic needs, Human Capabilities, Utilitarian)  New developments around human rights (not to basic necessities, but to representation and recognition)

Is there an energy threshold for a high quality of life (as in HDI)? From: Steinberger & Roberts 2009

Sufficiency & Goals for the Top Billion  UN’s Millenium Development Goals  For the “developing world” mostly, using Human Development Concepts  Being revised currently  But What of the Top Billion?  Goal-less?  Discussion around “Do the Top-Billion Need New Goals?” – Revkin (NYT) 

Articulating Sufficiency in a High Quality of Life  Understanding sufficiency is a key to global sustainable development, especially since emerging economies are often following US development patterns.

Module 2 - Energy & Climate Change  Module 2 - In Defining and Measuring Sustainability  Who’s responsible?  Who pays?  Who says?  Reading from: Michael Grubb; Seeking Fair Weather: Ethics and the International Debate on Climate Change, International Affairs, Vol. 71, No. 3, Ethics, the Environment and the Changing International Order. (July1995), pp

25 mt CO2e per capita Target ~2 mt CO2e in a carbon equitable world INTERNATIONAL CO2 per capita Emissions

Some Climate Impacts

Who Should Pay for Carbon Mitigation? [Discussion in Grubb]  Who Says Who Should Pay?

Peter Menzel, Material World Rural Indian Family – All belongings

Peter Menzel, Material World A US Family with All Belongings

Family in Japan – All Belongings

Family in Mali

Discussion

“Wisdom from our students” Challenges and Best Practices for Interdisciplinary Learning

IGERT Class of 2010: Do’s and Don'ts DO’S Move away from ideology & move towards common goals – more tangible Have consensus on how to treat data Develop common principles and frameworks Set up rules of engagement Know goals and backgrounds/perspectives Have common definitions/vocabulary Active listening Engage the other party Use Client-Client model – mutual respect Come with desire to develop relationships Be committed to listening and learning Shared meanings, languages Be open about general definitions DON’TS Not listening Disrespecting other’s ideas, feelings, knowledge Do not come from a place of “all-knowing” Don’t attack the people that are there Don’t assume they agree with you Don’t personalize the issue. Don’t monopolize the conversation Don’t be patronizing or dismissive Avoid insulting Don’t assume you entitled to more power or influence than others Don’t be disrespectful Don’t take it personal

IGERT Class of 2011: Do’s and Don'ts DO’S Listen Open Communication/Conversation Mutual Respect Be Prepared Understanding Vocabulary Aware of Biases Humility No Forced Consensus Outlines & Task Lists Highlighting Individual Strengths Process Diversity of Perspectives Respect Time Exploration Questions Use Examples Participate DON’TS Rely only on Technology Have a Vague Goal Be Condescending/Critical Give Unconstructive Criticism Use Jargon/Acronyms Be Afraid Argue for Argument Sake Use Normative Statements Generalize/Sterotype (by discipline) Ignore GoGossip Make/Take Things Personally