Employing Geoethics to Avoid Negative Nanotechnology Scenarios in Developing Countries

page 3 of 4

A developing country with nothing of intrinsic value to trade would result in environmental catastrophes. Image 2 shows Maslow’s Pyramid of priorities [1].

Image 2: Maslow's Pyramid

According to this pyramid, people would rape the environment due to a lack of resources, because the conservation of the environment is less important than satisfying their physiological needs. Despite the criticism made to Maslow’s theory, there are surveys showing that in fact the rise of the GDP of a society is related to the improvement of certain environmental markers and decreasing pollution. If these countries lose their prime income, primitive agriculture would devastate the rainforests on a much broader scale than currently experienced.

There will be a need for global regulation of nanotechnology if we choose to avoid the promise of recycling and conservation and turn to the uprising of poverty and degradation of nature. Recognizing the necessity for regulation is not a new issue concerning nanotechnology. In fact, almost since the birth of the concept, nanotechnology has been accompanied by the Foresight Institute Guidelines which are updated continuously.[2] These guidelines deal with many of the potential risks or misguided applications of nanotechnology; mostly with the effects of awry self-replicators, direct environmental damage, and nanotech-based weapons. They also deal with the ethical aspects of nanotechnology and its use for improving living standard in developing countries. “Poverty, disease, and natural disasters kill thousands, in some cases millions annually, and the potential to ameliorate their effects significantly should not be relinquished lightly, particularly by those least affected.”[3] In regards to the previously stated consequences to the biosphere, these guidelines do not explicitly state actions that could be taken to achieve this or an encouragement to do so. Note: At the time this paper was written, the former scenario was not contemplated in any consulted visions of the risks of nanotechnology.

According to Jamais Cascio, geoethics is “the set of guidelines pertaining to human behaviours that can affect larger planetary geophysical systems, including atmospheric, oceanic, geological, and plant/animal ecosystems. These guidelines are most relevant when the behaviours can result in long-term, widespread and/or hard-to-reverse changes in planetary systems.”[4] This definition is based upon the definition given by Mike Treder: “Geoethical means widely agreed-upon principles for guiding the application of technologies that can have a general environmental (including people) impact, much like bioethical principles (autonomy, beneficence, nonfeasance, justice) guide the application of curative technologies that specifically impact one or more patients.” [5]

Geoethics and its principles (See Table 1 below) can support an approach for a rational regulation of nanotechnology that prevents environmental disaster from happening due to the crash of the economies of developing countries.

Table 1: Principles of Geoethics (Cascio, 2005)

Principle	Definition
Interconnectedness	Planetary systems do not exist in isolation, and changes made to one system will have implications for other systems.
Diversity	On balance, a diverse ecosystem is more resilient and flexible, better able to adapt to natural changes.
Foresight	Consideration of effects of changes should embrace the planetary pace, not the human pace.
Integration	As human societies are part of the Earth's systems, changes made should take into consideration effects on human communities, and the needs of human communities should not be discounted or dismissed when considering overall impacts.
Expansion of Options	On balance, choices made should increase the number of options and opportunities for future generations, not reduce them.
Reversibility	Changes made to planetary systems should be done in a way that allows for reconsideration if unintended and unexpected consequences arise.

Concerning this issue, the geoethical principles of Integration, Diversity and Interconnectedness have special importance when applied to human populations as a key element in the global processes. Human populations do affect the ecosystems and do no exist in isolation. When given choices to become diverse and technologically proficient and better suited to changes, their needs must be fulfilled to achieve a more steady and environmentally sound state.

There are already ethical dilemmas concerning the wealth distribution in the Earth. Some figures claim that there is enough food to meet the world’s needs, but is not well distributed. Other points state that “The three richest people in the world control more wealth than all 600 million people living in the world's poorest countries.” [6] Yet currently the allocation of resources is expensive and resources are scarce. In the future, the abundance of such resources, thanks to nanoassemblers building them from scratch, will make the current dilemmas even tougher, because resources could be given to the neediest people almost for free. Yet for “security reasons”, a developed nation will not just give away nanotechnology and greater motives could be argued for keeping a monopoly over this technology and its fruits.

Next Page

Footnotes
1. Maslow’s Pyramid of Priorities includes the following "Fulfillment steps", to be read from bottom to top:

• Self-actualization desires and yearnings.
• Esteem hankerings.
• Social yearnings.
• Safety adherence.
• Physiological, steady competence needs.

Maslow called the first four stages deficit needs, or D-needs. The top two stages are being-needs (B-needs) and relate to desires and yearnings for self-actualization. Wikipedia, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. (back to top)

2. Foresight Nanotech Institute, Molecular Nanotechnology Guidelines. (back to top)

3. Ibid. (back to top)

4. Cascio, Terraforming Earth, Part III: Geoethical Principles. (back to top)

5. Foresight Nanotech Institute, Molecular Nanotechnology Guidelines. (back to top)

6. Wikipedia, Poverty. (back to top)

 

 

1 2 3 4 Next Page>