The Coalfields Expressway and the Principle of Double Effect

Author #1

Presentation #1 Abstract or Summary

The ethical principle of double effect holds that where a contemplated action has both good and bad results, it is permissible only if it is not wrong in itself and if the bad result is not intended, either as means to the good result or as end in itself. This principle has been helpfully applied to a number of difficult moral questions, particularly in medical ethics. In this paper, I will consider the usefulness of this principle in one particular, admittedly somewhat unorthodox case: the Coalfields Expressway in Appalachia. I will argue that, in spite of some limitations, it does in fact raise useful considerations. The Coalfields Expressway has been the cause of significant debate because it combines the construction of a highway through southern Appalachia with mountaintop removal coal mining (MTR), a highly controversial practice in itself. The relevance of the principle of double effect becomes clear: If highway construction is arguably a good result, and MTR arguably a bad one, is the project morally permissible based on the intended good outcome? Difficulties immediately arise. Both results – the construction of a highway and MTR – are complex, not unequivocally good or bad. I will argue, however, that the principle of double effect indicates that more complete assessment of the environmental effects of the project and some knowledge of the intentions of decision makers are needed to evaluate its morality. Thus the principle of double effect does indeed clarify ethically relevant considerations to the debate over this contested project.

 
Mar 30th, 10:00 AM Mar 30th, 11:15 AM

The Coalfields Expressway and the Principle of Double Effect

Corbly Hall 466

The ethical principle of double effect holds that where a contemplated action has both good and bad results, it is permissible only if it is not wrong in itself and if the bad result is not intended, either as means to the good result or as end in itself. This principle has been helpfully applied to a number of difficult moral questions, particularly in medical ethics. In this paper, I will consider the usefulness of this principle in one particular, admittedly somewhat unorthodox case: the Coalfields Expressway in Appalachia. I will argue that, in spite of some limitations, it does in fact raise useful considerations. The Coalfields Expressway has been the cause of significant debate because it combines the construction of a highway through southern Appalachia with mountaintop removal coal mining (MTR), a highly controversial practice in itself. The relevance of the principle of double effect becomes clear: If highway construction is arguably a good result, and MTR arguably a bad one, is the project morally permissible based on the intended good outcome? Difficulties immediately arise. Both results – the construction of a highway and MTR – are complex, not unequivocally good or bad. I will argue, however, that the principle of double effect indicates that more complete assessment of the environmental effects of the project and some knowledge of the intentions of decision makers are needed to evaluate its morality. Thus the principle of double effect does indeed clarify ethically relevant considerations to the debate over this contested project.