Season 1, Episode 4

Willis Jenkins on Humanities and Environmental Change

On this episode of Free Range, Mike Livermore speaks with Willis Jenkins, the John Allen Hollingsworth Professor of Ethics and Chair of the University of Virginia’s Department of Religious Studies. Jenkins studies the intersections of environmental and cultural change. At UVA, he works with the Environmental Humanities program, teaches for the Global Sustainability major and Environmental Thought & Practice major, and serves on the leadership team for the Environmental Resilience Institute (ERI). In this episode, learn about Jenkin’s work on water security and hear his thoughts on the connection between religion, ethics, politics, and the environment.

Episode is an appropriate teaching tool for but not limited to the following topics & courses: religious thought, climate ethics, post-humanist political theologies, climate change, food ethics

Discussion Questions

  • Jenkins states that the concepts which organize research, especially environmental change research, can have an “unreflective, normative frame to them.” Do you agree? Do you feel like this has changed in recent years?
  • How do indigenous and local value regimes related to nature compare and contrast with global or Western environmental values?
  • Jenkins specifically named intrinsic value and indigenous value as examples of alternative values regimes. What are some other examples of value regimes that can be applied to water security or other environmental issues? Does following alternative approaches to their logical policy endpoints produce surprising or radically different results from when more normative presumptions predominate?
  • Jenkins emphasizes the need to be cognizant of our own cultural context and the narratives we embed ourselves in. How can such awareness influence our approach to environmental policy? Does this mean we should seek some form of culturally-neutral approach? Is this possible? Is it desirable? How is this notion of objectivity with regards to culture and narrative similar or different than (contestable) notions of objectivity in science?
  • How do value regimes shape the metrics and indicators chosen to evaluate environmental policy success?
  • Is it appropriate for academics and technocrats to make contestable value judgments, when the real-world impact of those judgments may be undesirable by those external to the decision-making process?
  • Is it undemocratic for unelected decision-makers to use radical or non-mainstream value ethics in their policy prescriptions?
  • Jenkins, and the Long article above, discuss how the small Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan has centered their Buddhist heritage and made it a driving force in crafting a humanistic environmental ethic central to their political identity. Can America strive for something similar? Or are the differences between Bhutan and the US simply too great to make meaningful comparisons?
  •  In the face of global challenges like climate change, how can international policies respect diverse value regimes while adhering to normative principles that promote global good?
  • How do value regimes and normative beliefs influence the perception and management of emerging environmental technologies, such as geoengineering?
  •  Might further emphasis on pluralistic values discourse stifle our ability to act rapidly in the face of urgent crisis?

Additional Readings