Between weapons, women, and goods produced by slave labor, the world has a long way to go on the path to ethical trade. The energy market is particularly problematic, given how fundamental it is to the global economy, how much of it comes from regimes recognized as violators of human rights, and how stubbornly the industry has obstructed efforts to tackle climate change. That's partly why I've been critical of Canada's attempts to label its dirtier-than-average petroleum as "ethical oil." My main dispute is that if we're going to start talking about ethical oil, then that opens the door to asking: Why not ethical everything? My sense is that the spinmeisters behind the "ethical oil" campaign aren't interested in having that conversation. Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki touches on some of the details of their hypocrisy in a recent blog post, and one idea in particular stands out to me:

The "ethical oil" argument is so absurd as to be hardly worth mentioning, but it's one the government has latched onto. Oil can't be ethical or unethical. People, and by extension the companies they own and operate or the governments they represent, can behave in ethical or unethical ways, but a product can't.

While Suzuki wins the semantic battle I wonder if he loses the war of actually applying ethics to international trade. Humans love to pronounce things good or evil, and our objects embody the values with which they were created. Today this tendency is expressed in the certification revolution of products such as Fair Trade coffee. With the premium price such products demand they have always flirted with the fetishism of elite luxury, but perhaps it is equally dangerous to strip our material goods of their talismanic power, if such power is wielded for a socially recognized good. By transferring all moral responsibility onto actors—be they consumers, businesses, or governments—Suzuki outlines a very stoic social responsibility. The point is to figure out how the system, and the tradable goods themselves, can carry this burden for us.

[PHOTO CREDIT: Roger Blood (CC).]

Views: 146

Tags: business, environment, ethics, oil, trade


You need to be a member of Global Ethics Network to add comments!

Join Global Ethics Network

Carnegie Council

The Democratic Debate and Competing Narratives

As the Democratic field of presidential candidates narrows, the contenders are beginning to devote more attention to foreign policy and Senior Fellow Nikolas Gvosdev has some important questions: Would Warren and Sanders stand by with their non-interventionist stances if they make it to the White House? Will climate change become a focus for any of the candidates?

Behind AI Decision-Making, with Francesca Rossi

With artificial intelligence embedded into social media, credit card transactions, GPS, and much more, how can we train it to act in an ethical, fair, and unbiased manner? What are the theories and philosophies behind AI systems? IBM Research's Francesca Rossi discusses her work helping to ensure that the technology is "as beneficial as possible for the widest part of the population."

Foreign Policy Narratives in Palm Beach

After an invitation to speak at a gathering of the Palm Beach chapter of the United Nations Association of the United States, U.S. Global Engagement Senior Fellow Nikolas Gvosdev reflects on the current scope and direction of U.S. foreign policy. How will new uncertainties in the international system influence the relationships among the democratic community of nations?





© 2020   Created by Carnegie Council.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

The views and opinions expressed in the media, comments, or publications on this website are those of the speakers or authors and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions held by Carnegie Council.