



































EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, Number 1,  May, 2020


EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

MARAIZU ELECHI, PhD                                                                                                                                                   Page 30 
 

CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF BASIC CHALLENGES IN 

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS AND SUSTAINABILITY IN NIGERIA 

 

MARAIZU ELECHI, PhD 

Department of Philosophy 

Rivers State University, Port Harcourt 

Email: drmaraizuelechi@yahoomail.com 

 

 

Abstract 

The care, management and preservation of the natural environment is an 

important aspect of the branch of philosophy known as environmental 

philosophy. Sometimes, environmental philosophy is called environmental 

ethics. It is concerned with the critical evaluation of human activities in his 

environment. It explains sensitive issues that border on the environment in 

relationship with man, the need to protect and preserve the environment and 

the effects of environmental degradation and possible solutions. This paper 

thus reflects on the basic problem in environmental ethics and sustainability in 

Nigeria, which it considers as the lack of adequate understanding of the 

environment and the place or role of man in its preservation. The paper argues 

that the relationship between man and the environment must be one in mutual 

dependency and harmony. Therefore excessive exploitation of the 

environment by man must be avoided and the environment seen and 

appreciated from its intrinsic worth. Otherwise, there will not be an end to 

environmental disasters since the environment has a way of fighting back. In 

the end, the paper recommends immediate stimulation of environmental 

consciousness or awareness as a formidable approach to the preservation, 

conservation and sustenance of the environment. 

 

Keywords: Environment, environmental ethics, environmental disaster, 

environmental consciousness, mutual dependency. 

 

Introduction 

The challenges in environmental ethics are many. One of those challenges 

include how man should relate with the environment since it is the physical 

ground of his existence. It also considers whether man has any ethical 

obligation with regards to the environment; and if he does, what are the 

logical reasons for this obligation as well as the extent of man’s duty or 

responsibility to this obligation. The critical analysis of the importance of 

these basic philosophical issues or challenges is quite germane especially 

against the backdrop of man’s activities and attitude towards the environment 

and in consideration of the co-determination of the quality of human life and 

general wellbeing and continuation, and the flourishing of other natural 

species and or environment. Pope Francis, in his Encyclical Laudatosi, writes: 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

MARAIZU ELECHI, PhD                                                                                                                                                   Page 31 
 

“The urgent challenge to protect our common home includes a concern to 

bring the whole family together to seek a sustainable and integral 

development, for we know that things can change” (no. 13). He continues “I 

urgently appeal … for a new dialogue about how we are shaping the future of 

our planet. We need a conversation which includes everyone, since the 

environmental challenge we are undergoing, and its human roots, concern and 

affect us all” (no. 14). Most importantly and mind-touching is Pope Francis’ 

feminization of the environment by referring to it as “our sister and mother 

who sustains us”. According to him, this our sister and mother now cries out 

to us because of the harm we have inflicted on her by our irresponsible use 

and abuse of the goods with which God has endowed her. We have come to 

see ourselves as her lords and masters, entitled to plunder her at will. 

 

This maltreatment and domination done to the environment, Pope Francis 

argues, is responsible for the widespread environmental degradation, the 

“sickness evident in the soil, in the water, in the air and in all forms of life” 

while the environment groans in travail. The occurrences of disastrous 

phenomena like erosions, earthquakes, volcanic eruption, etc., clearly indicate 

the destabilization of the cosmic relationship existing between man and the 

environment. These catastrophes arise mainly from human activities in the 

environment such as indiscriminate dumping of refuse, mismanagement of oil 

spill and exploration activities as well as nonchalant attitude towards the 

management and sustenance of the environment. 

 

The environment, no doubt, is more than we ordinarily can imagine especially 

in its complexities, relations and activities. For this reason, passivity on the 

part of man towards the totality of the existential domain in which his being 

unfolds and continually accounted for is very dangerous. It calls for critical 

reflection and pragmatic approach since the environment provides the basis of 

human activities and interactions with other beings in the world. In fact, it is 

contradictory to think of man outside the environment; he is part and parcel of 

it. 

 

Theoretical Reflections 

It has become expedient for us at this point to briefly evolve some sort of 

theoretical reflections or clarifications of the concept that constitutes our study: 

“environmental philosophy”. First and foremost, the concept “environment” is a 

very broad and composite concept. Therefore, it is better we approach our 

understanding of the term ‘environment’ by looking at its root word. 

Environment means "that which environs us". And being "environed" simply 

means being encircled or surrounded. Broadly speaking, the term “environment” 

is understood as the overall physical, natural, cultural, social conditions 

surrounding man. It pervades the economic, social, political, literary, religious, 

cultural and scientific planes. In fact, it covers the whole facet of human life and 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

MARAIZU ELECHI, PhD                                                                                                                                                   Page 32 
 

behavior, rendering it, therefore, a universal or global issue. Michael Barbiar 

writes that: “An environment is the complex set of physical, geographic, 

biological, social, cultural and political conditions that surround an individual or 

organism and that ultimately determine its form” (89). The environment is the 

totality of the existential domain or ecosphere in which our being unfolds. It 

refers to all the facts and relations, when taken together, play a role in shaping our 

consciousness in particular ways and in relation to other beings and these other 

beings in relation to others (Njiofor 234).The environment, according to Njiofor;, 

Generally consists of the cosmological and 

territorial, the metaphysical and physical 

(material composition) of our living surrounding 

and its spatial area including the ontological 

forces of interaction of the biotic and abiotic 

factors therein… the environment is understood 

as constituted of the immediate and remote 

spatio-temporal dimensional base of human 

existence in the world (233). 

 

 In his article Personification of Environment: An Alternative to Extreme 

Empiricist and Rationalist Based Environmentalism, Asouzu defined the 

environment as:  

The framework within which we [live], mould 

our thoughts, actions and feelings from which 

we can be understood and perceived as persons 

other than the environment itself… our 

environment is the foundation of our activities 

especially of our attempt at giving meaning to 

life (143). 

The environment influences how people live their lives and how societies 

develop. For this reason, people’s progress, economic development and 

environment are closely linked up together. We therefore need to explore, 

tend and protect our environment in order to live happily (Alawa144). 

 

Now, to the question – what is environmental ethics? Environmental ethics 

which is sometimes called environmental philosophy is a new branch of 

philosophy that is concerned with the natural environment and humans’ place 

within it (Belshaw4). Its concern is basically to provide philosophical basis 

and or solutions to environmental challenges facing man. Environmental 

ethics embodies a set of principles that could guide humans in dealing with 

environmental issues. It is a young field of study that brings together 

traditional nurturing of wisdom with a specific interest in the environment. 

Part of environmental philosophy is, therefore, exploring what we know that 

is, our justifiable true believe about the environment. But we have to be 

careful not to stop there. For, environmental ethics requires us to develop 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

MARAIZU ELECHI, PhD                                                                                                                                                   Page 33 
 

wisdom about the environment and that means, as we have noted above, 

discussing what is best for the environment, especially with respect to our 

own actions within the environment. This branch of philosophy also considers 

animals and the natural world or reality otherwise known as “the biotic 

community”. According to Aldo Leopold “A thing is right when it tends to 

preserve the integrity, stability and beauty of the biotic community. It is 

wrong when it tends otherwise”. Environmental philosophy asks very 

important questions like: why do we need to preserve the environment? What 

is the place of man in relation to the environment? These philosophical 

questions constitute some of our major reflections in this paper. 

 

Why Preserve the Environment? 

This philosophical question has left philosophers divided in their views. Some 

are of the view that we need to preserve the environment because of its 

economic and practical values or benefits to man. This view is known as the 

Anthropocentric View of the Environment. It is championed by the 

conservationist philosophers like Giffford Pinchot, Fein Blur, etc. For them, 

the environment needs to be preserved because it provides economic values to 

man; it is beneficial to man with the rich diversity of resources required by 

him to survive. This view considers all natural creatures as meant to serve the 

benefit or interest of man. It considers nature or the environment as having 

extrinsic rather than intrinsic value. This is another way of saying that the 

environment has a human-centered attitude or function. There is a serious 

challenge or inherent flaw in this conception. There is no doubt however that 

there are two values, namely intrinsic and extrinsic values that are associated 

with the being or nature of anything and everything, but to claim that every 

natural being, objects or realities have extrinsic value only regardless of their 

intrinsic practical value in themselves is a misnomer. 

 

What constitutes extrinsic values of the environment? The extrinsic values of 

the environment are those worthwhile things which lie outside of 

environmental experience, but are brought about by it. Although, they are 

values led by, and resulting from the environment. The extrinsic values of the 

environment are material or economic values made possible through the 

exploitation and exploration of the environment. On the other hand, intrinsic 

values of the environment are those values that do not only lie within and 

constitute the nature or essence of the environment, but also those values that 

are not necessarily discernible by the outward looks of the environment. In 

relations to man and his environment, we can say for instance that the intrinsic 

value of the environment is the sympathy, the mutual natural dependency and 

interconnectedness of life and living among all realities, especially between 

man and his environment. Unfortunately, these are not popularly recognized 

values, that is, that not many people will share our point of view. This is 

because arguments about the values of the environment which take their 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

MARAIZU ELECHI, PhD                                                                                                                                                   Page 34 
 

premises from human material needs and survival always win their audience. 

We all need to survive – even philosophers do – so arguments about the 

values of the environment which pick the premises from human survival and 

material values appeal to our soft spots. The need for human material values is 

important; but, it is all the same, not the only need that humans have. Joad 

puts it thus: 

… Our age governed pre-eminently by the 

stomach and pocket view of life, demands of 

whatever is proffered forits approval that it shall 

‘deliver the goods’… But what of the capacity 

for clear thinking, the sympathy and tolerance 

which come from a lively understanding of the 

views and difficulties of others… and the habit 

of disinterested intellectual inquiry. Do these 

not add to the fullness and richness of our lives? 

(68-9). 

 

In fact, to begin with, material benefits are not ultimate issues in the mind of a 

philosopher. Therefore the conceptions of why man should preserve the 

environment as rooted in terms of material gains or pleasure is implausible. It 

is fraught with the consequences of reducing man to the appetitive level of 

lower animals. In other words, humans need the environment to be properly 

human. Rather than just a means to an end, the environment also serves an end 

in itself. Therefore nature needs to be respected and preserved not only 

because it is simply the right and appropriate thing to do regardless of some 

sorts of benefit it bestows on man, but also because it has values in itself. This 

is in tandem with the view of the naturalist philosopher John Muir when he 

argues that nature needs to be preserved because it is a service for human 

pleasure and satisfaction which are not merely instrumental for anything else, 

but rather valuable in itself. In fact, to extend this argument further is the view 

of the ethicists that man requires to respect and preserve the environment even 

when it has no human use or value. This is the moral duty of man to even 

animals, biological and other natural realities. 

 

To put the argument straight, it is our view that the importance or need to 

preserve the environment goes beyond the recourse to intrinsic or extrinsic 

values as being argued by some philosophers. It rather encompasses a more 

holistic human-centered value system. The environment as a matter of fact 

must be seen and treated as one in mutual relationship or interdependency 

with man in such a way that each plays crucial role in the collective existence 

and co-existence of all. What this means is that we need to preserve the 

environment because it is better to see the environment as a system and 

collectivity rather than as a separate entity in relation to man. This is so 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

MARAIZU ELECHI, PhD                                                                                                                                                   Page 35 
 

because there is a mutual natural dependency and interconnectedness of life 

and living among all realities.  

In this relationship of mutual dependence, the 

environment provides the individual with the 

possibilities for shaping his life in a meaningful 

way. Since the environment provides the 

individual with the foundation for a meaningful 

existence, a radical irresponsible incursion into 

the environment could distort the fundamental 

mutual relationship between man and his 

environment. This mutual relationship is like a 

bond or contract in which each partner is 

expected to contribute his just quota towards 

effective realization of the content(s) of the 

contract (Asouzu 149). 

 

The point is that the relationship between man and the environment is one that 

should be mutual and complementary. Beniston also subscribed to this view 

when he writes: 

The revolution of humankind was largely 

dependent on the quality of the environment and 

resources it provides in terms of water, food, 

and favourable health conditions. These are as 

vital as ever… Today [however], the conditions 

for human sustainability (i.e. water quality and 

quantity, food security, and health) are 

potentially under threat as a result of numerous 

human-induced factors; among these, climate 

change (557). 

 

Man and His Environment 

Man, his nature, place or role in the environment constitutes primarily the 

center and point of departure for every rewarding philosophizing. The reason 

is that the environment is one of the basic features of human existence. It is a 

natural creature and at the same time a natural necessity for man. The 

environment not only serves enormous benefits for man, but man conversely 

is a product of it. In fact, man is part and parcel of the environment. The role 

of man in the preservation of the environment is surprisingly in a serious 

dispute among philosophers thereby making the possibility of reaching 

consensus on the issues difficult. This is quite understandable because rational 

argument is the beauty of philosophy. This paper therefore lends a view to the 

question, but in doing so, we find the following questions very pertinent to be 

unbiasedly answered to enable us better understand and appreciate the issue 

and take a stand – ‘Are humans equal or above other natural beings? Do they 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

MARAIZU ELECHI, PhD                                                                                                                                                   Page 36 
 

have special rights and privileges over and above other natural beings? Do 

they have higher and special role in shaping and managing nature? IF YES, 

why are they assigned this burden or moral status over the environment? We 

need to answer these questions as we have already said, to be able to properly 

define the place of man in the natural environment. 

 

Taking our departure from the Judeo-Christian doctrine we found that human 

beings are created in the image of God - imago Dei – with the responsibility to 

take charge of nature or the environment and by extension, use animals and 

other natural resources for their own purposes and advantages. There is no 

doubt that this freedom and privilege given to man has resulted to the 

emergence of certain arrogance towards the environment, which led Lynn 

White to argue in his work The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis 

published in 1967, that the arrogance has bolstered the growth of science and 

technology. This supremacy assumed by humans is responsible to many 

environmental problems. They also result to the arrogant disregard for the 

rights of other living things by man. Contrary to this, is the view of some 

environmental philosophers that man is part and parcel of natural cum 

biological environment and not above or outside it. For this reason, man must 

ensure the promotion of an egalitarian environment, this is a holistic or 

general overview of his natural place in it. This is the view defended by Paul 

Taylor in his work Respect for Nature published in 1986 in which he 

meticulously argued that there should be a bio-centric egalitarianism in which 

all living organisms have rights claims. He considers this a moral principle 

which he calls ‘priority principles’. According to him, this will help to guide 

against cases of conflict between human beings and things in nature. This 

appears to be pointing towards assigning humans an equal place in nature with 

biological creatures and other natural beings. But the place of man towards 

nature or the environment is that of the role of stewards of nature or 

environment, including the biological creatures. This is a very special and 

important role. 

 

Secondly, man, from the rational point of view is the only creature by nature 

that possesses reason and intelligence. He is a thinking intelligent being with 

reason and reflection. The essence of which therefore lies in the exercise of 

the characteristics of his nature in leading an intelligent and rational life 

towards the rest of natural beings or realities. His natural perfection, 

endowment or credential puts his in the position to exercise those powers and 

capacities, that is, rational intelligence and understanding towards the control, 

maintenance and preservation of the environment. This is very important 

because as natural creatures, humans must firmly come to terms with the 

meaning of natural wisdom. And if environmental philosophy is about 

anything in particular, it is and would be about the love of natural wisdom. 

This, according to Aristotle is the role which man did not arrogate to himself, 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

MARAIZU ELECHI, PhD                                                                                                                                                   Page 37 
 

but one which nature has conditioned him by virtue of certain natural 

credentials, gifts and endowments. 

 

Examining the Moral Status of Man towards the Environment 

It may be argued that since some constituent elements of the environment do 

not experience pleasure or feel pain, so what would be wrong with destroying 

them by man? What is wrong with defacing a mountain ridge or an old-

growth tree? Can we include lower animals and forests within the compass of 

the moral realm? Do they deserve moral consideration? We have to answer 

these questions because the environment has so been exploited by man to the 

extent that philosophers are worried about whether there is a moral status of 

man towards the environment. 

 

The question of what moral status or consideration animals, biological areas 

and natural environment places on man has been a subject of much discussion 

by environmental philosophers. For instance Aldo Leopold affirms the moral 

status of ecological areas; Paul Taylor assigns moral status to all living things, 

and Jeremy Bentham argues that unnecessary suffering should not be inflicted 

on beings and the environment at large even if they do not have any moral 

status or consideration. The legal philosopher Christopher Stone argues that 

natural environment should have the legal right to be protected from improper 

use. He maintains that the courts should recognize the claims of natural 

environment to be protected. In his book Animal Liberation, published in 

1975, Peter Singer advocates for the moral status of animals. Yet, it seems to 

us that many people would disagree that moral consideration should be 

extended to even appetitive creatures.  

 

The utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) attempted an answer 

to these questions with his comment: ‘Can the constituent elements of the 

environment feel? If they can, then they deserve moral consideration, but if 

they do not, then they do not deserve any moral consideration’. The point is 

that if they do not have moral consideration, then they can be exploited, 

abused and aesthetically violated. This is the reason why man spoils the 

beauty of nature and conversely nature reacts thus causing harm to man. 

Joseph Omoregbe was right when he says that nobody can cheat nature and 

get away with it. Nature will always have the last word. After the violation 

and the enjoyment resulting from it, the punishment will surely follow in a 

manner and at a time one may not expect. To avoid the inevitable punishment 

of going against the law of nature, it is pertinent that we embark on the 

exploration of nature with certain ethical principles that will not provoke 

nature to act. 

 

Feeling, thinking, being conscious, reasoning, reflecting, willing, doubting, 

questioning and remembering qualify any being worthy of moral 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

MARAIZU ELECHI, PhD                                                                                                                                                   Page 38 
 

consideration. This position leaves us with the thought that humans are the 

only being worthy of moral consideration. If this is the case, why are humans 

exploited, abused and violated by fellow humans even when they have moral 

consideration? Albert in his book The Philosophy of Civilization published in 

1923 defends the doctrine of ‘Reverence for Life’. He argues that all living 

things are worthy of respect, arguing that one should not kill bugs, ants or 

even plants if this can be avoided. He argues further that the aesthetic values 

of the natural environment should be maintained or preserved notwithstanding 

the economic exploration or end which it serves. Schweitzer’s position, no 

doubt, appropriates the extension of moral consideration to both human and 

nonhuman beings. But this may be considered odd by some philosophers, 

especially those who argue that biological creatures live at the expense of 

human beings. In order to wriggle out of consideration, Schweitzer concludes 

his argument (which equally lends credence to the exploitation of the 

environment. This conclusion seems rife, in consideration to the extent that 

the nature of the moral status of animals in particular and the environment in 

general remains a challenge. Yet, the question of how to weigh differing 

values, and what moral status to assign to nature, has been the stimulus for 

environmental philosophy. 

 

Environmental Sustainability: the Nigeria Question 

The sustenance of the environment has a compelling ethical dimension. It 

simply means the need to preserve the environment for the future. This means 

that there is a natural moral urge towards self-preservation since the 

environment is the spatio-temporal base of human existence and coexistence. 

Environmental sustainability simply means community or societal 

sustainability. Environmental issues pervade the whole facet of human life; it 

pervades the whole act of human behavior and thinking. Its sustenance clearly 

explains the difference between a group of people and others; between one 

clime and another, between civility and incivility, and between developed and 

undeveloped nations. There appears to be no genuine and sincere commitment 

by the human society especially in Nigeria towards the care and preservation 

of the environment. Incredible varieties of human activities in Nigeria have 

turned what is supposed to be for the good of man against him. Such human 

activities like oil exploration, gas flaring, mining, forest logging, bush burning 

etc., have adversely affected the Nigerian environment. There are issues of 

climatic change: rivers are drying up and sometimes disappearing, the ozone 

layer is depleting, and most importantly, the issue of sooth in the oil rich 

Niger Delta Region of Nigeria, especially in Rivers State.  Forests are gone, 

mainly as a result of deforestation. Human life is in danger with increasing 

cases of deaths as a result of contaminated air and water pollutions. Game 

reserves or familiar animals are almost thrown into extinction, with increasing 

cases of erosion menace worsening the situation. This situation provides a 

clear prismatic compass of where we are heading to as a nation. For, one of 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

MARAIZU ELECHI, PhD                                                                                                                                                   Page 39 
 

the yardsticks for determining how developed a society has attained is with 

reference to the environment, that is, the overall manipulation, exploitation, 

conservation, preservation and sustainability of the environment. 

Environmental sustainability in Nigeria is a very serious concern, but the good 

news is that it can be achieved. It must be achieved through ecological 

consciousness or awareness, value orientation, advancement of responsible 

ecological citizenship and ecological conversion and institution of workable 

laws or legal framework. This is what Njiofor means when he writes:  

Environmental problem is due mainly to our ill-

nurtured environmental orientation; it is due to 

poor understanding of the concept of the 

environment and our place in it. It is a problem 

of excesses accruing from wrong understanding 

and definition of need; a problem of wrong 

attitude towards the foundation and physical 

ground of one’s own existence (240).  

 

This form of education would include ethico-moral harmony with the 

environment; the consideration and recognition of the centrality of the 

environment in the being of man and existence. The point is that 

environmental education is key to environmental sustainability in Nigeria. 

Educating the citizens on conservation, that is, the care, protection, 

preservation and improvement of the environment is very important. This 

knowledge is very essential for further decisions or policies on the 

improvement of the quality of the environment. Any attempt at doing the 

contrary would amount to undermining environmental education and the 

ethical obligation of man towards the protection and preservation of the 

environment. The consequence of this will bevery grave on the continued 

existence of man and the country. Environmental education simply put, is “a 

permanent process through which individuals gain awareness of their 

environment and acquire the knowledge, values, skills, experiences and 

determination which will enable them act individually and collectively to 

solve present and future environmental problems”. This education must be 

continuous and unending including parents, schools, society and government. 

It should be accommodated in the curriculum content of learning in our 

schools and colleges. It requires conscious effort and commitment from all 

and sundry including the global community. In fact, global consensus is 

seriously needed to confront environmental problems because environmental 

issues are global issues. The reason is that unilateral actions on the part of 

individuals or specific countries cannot achieve environmental sustainability. 

Such as planning a sustainable and diversified agriculture, developing 

renewable and less polluting forms of energy, encouraging a more efficient 

use of energy, promoting a better management of marine and forest resources, 

and ensuring universal access to drinking water (Obungwah et al,191-192). 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

MARAIZU ELECHI, PhD                                                                                                                                                   Page 40 
 

This position is also expressed by Engel and Engel (1990) in their article 

presented in a Conference on the Conservation and Development of the 

Environment. According to them, concrete solutions to environmental 

problems will largely depend on a new organizational capacity of society as a 

whole, based on the cultural values of different communities, their creativity 

and their potentials for innovations. 

 

Conclusion and Recommendations 

A keen awareness, detailed observations and an enthusiastic sustenance or 

preservation of the natural world that environs is the responsibility of us all. 

Therefore we must simply and squarely imbibe the stimulation of 

environmental consciousness or awareness as a formidable approach to 

preserve, conserve and sustain the environment. We must consciously seek to 

maintain a mutual and complementary relationship with the environment since 

our survival and wellbeing depends on the conducive nature of our 

environment. To this end, Nigerian people and government must develop 

conscious culture of the preservation of nature and desist from disrupting the 

natural processes of things and their ecological relationships in the world by 

engaging only in responsible environmentally or eco-friendly actions. 

Government must implement measures to check environmental pollution by 

individuals, companies, factories, industries, etc. It must regulate deforestation 

and afforestation meticulously and ensure that houses are built with proper 

drainages. The government of Nigeria must ensure that it develops a market 

economy that encourages recycling and discourages waste of limited 

resources. The continuous enlightenment of the citizenry on environmental 

protection and preservation by government must be encouraged. Government 

must evolve workable laws or appropriate legal framework necessary for the 

conservation and preservation of the environment. 

 

References 

Alawa, P. (2016). Kant and Heidegger on Environmental Ethics: A 

Comparative Study.Port  Harcourt Journal of History and Diplomatic 

Studies, Port Harcourt, Ignatius Ajuru University of Education, vol. 3, 

No.1, 143-157. 

Asouzu, Innocent I. (1999). Personification of Environment: An Alternative to 

Extreme Empiricist and Rationalist Based Environmentalism, Global Journal 

of Pure and Applies Sciences.Vol. 5, No. 1, 143-151. 

Barbier, M. (1979).Introduction to Chemical Ecology. London: Richard Clay 

and Chauser Publishers. 

Belshaw, Christopher (2001). Environmental Philosophy. Chesham: Acumen. 

Beniston, Martin (2010). “Climate Change and its Impact: Growing Stress 

Factors for Human  Societies” in International Review of the Red Cross. 

Vol. 98, No. 879. 

Joad, C.E.M. (1960). The Essence of Precis. Methuen, London. 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

MARAIZU ELECHI, PhD                                                                                                                                                   Page 41 
 

Njiofor J.C. (2016). Safeguarding our Environment: Insight from an African 

Environmental  Ethical Approach in Sophia: An African Journal of 

Philosophy and Public Affairs. Vol.17, No.1. 

Obungwah F., et al (2017). Environmental Consciousness and Sustainability 

ViaLaudato Si: An  Ethico-Spiritual Implication for the Niger Delta. 

Icheke: Journal of Faculty of  Humanities. Vol.15 No.1, Art Angle: Port 

Harcourt. 

 

 

 

 


