Skip to main content
Log in

Consequential Utilitarianism: Addressing Ethical Deficiencies in the Municipal Landfill Siting Process

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper examines ethical concerns of the utilitarian paradigm, the greatest good for the greatest number, advocated by many proponents and consultants in siting landfills. The implications of the consequentialist utilitarian approach are considered through the examination of a landfill-site-search case study in Ontario, Canada. Limitations to such an approach, in terms of differing values, equal consideration, equitable participation, distributive justice and the emphasis on non-quantifiable factors are discussed. Recommendations to improve the process are made based on the ethical analysis of the case study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackerman, Frank: 1996, ‘Trashing Recycling: The New Face of Anti-Environmentalism’, Dollars & Sense 208, 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ali, Harris: 1999, ‘The Search for a Landfill Site in the Risk Society’, The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 36(1), 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armour, Audrey: 1992, ‘The Co-operative Process: Facility Siting the Democratic Way’, Plan Canada(March).

  • Amour, Audrey: 1986, ‘Nuclear Reactors-Nuclear Waste: Resolving Public Acceptance Issues’, presentation to the Canadian Nuclear Society (April 29).

  • Bartkiw, D.: 1991, ‘Making Decisions in the Face of Uncertainty: Issues, Priorities and Progress’, in Ed Murray E. Haight (ed.), Municipal Solid Waste Management: Making Decisions in the Face of Uncertainty(University of Waterloo Press, Waterloo, Ontario).

    Google Scholar 

  • Baxter, Jamie, John Eyles and Susan Elliot: 1999, ‘From Siting Principles to Siting Practices: A Case Study of Discord Among Trust, Equity and Community Participation’, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 42(4), 501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumberg, Louis and Robert Gottlieb: 1989, War on Waste: Can America Win its Battle With Garbage?(Inland Press, Washington, DC).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Michael H.: 1988, The Toxic Cloud(Harper and Row, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cragg, Wesley, Michael McDonald and Jack Stevenson: 1992, The Demand/Supply Plan and the Moose River Basin; Ethical Parameters. Prepared on behalf of the Moose River/James Bay Coalition.

  • Crisp, Roger: 1997, Mill on Utilitarianism(Routledge, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Creighton, James L.: 1981, The Public Involvement Manual(Abt Books, Cambridge, MA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Crooks, Harold: 1993, The Giants of Garbage(James Lorimer & Company, Toronto).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, Robert A.: 1989, Democracy and its Critics(Yale University Press: New Haven).

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, Tony: 1987, ‘Garbage: To Burn or Not to Burn?’, Technology Review 90, 19–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ducsik, Dennis W.: 1978, ‘Electricity Planning and the Environment: Toward a New Role for Government in the Decision Process’, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Dept of Civil Engineering, M.I.T., Cambridge, Massachusette.

  • Goldstein, Nora and Jim Glenn: 1997. ‘The State of Garbage in America’, BioCycle(May 1997).

  • Gundersen, Aldoph G.: 1995, The Environmental Promise of Democratic Deliberation(University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin).

    Google Scholar 

  • Haight, Ed Murray: 1991, Municipal Solid Waste Management: Making Decisions in the Face of Uncertainty(University of Waterloo Press, Waterloo, Ontario).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardin, Russell: 1988, Morality Within the Limits of Reason(University of Chicago Press, Chicago).

    Google Scholar 

  • Honstaff, Terry: 1993, Chair of the Turtle Lake Ratepayers Association, Interview (March 16th).

  • Hource, Peter: 1992, Senior Environmental Assessment Planner, R. Cave and Associates, Lecture at University of Toronto (November 16th).

  • Jackson, John: 1999, Resources – Not Garbage, Municipal Solid Waste in Ontario.

  • King, Cheryl Simrell, Kathryn M. Feltey and Bridget O'Neil Susel: 1998, ‘The Question of Participation: Toward Authentic Public Participation in Public Administration’, Public Administration Review 58(4), 317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, D. P.: 1996, ‘Approaches and Methods of Siting Locally Unwanted Waste Facilities’, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 39(2), 165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang, Reg: 1990, Fair Siting in Waste Management. Paper to International Symposium on Hazardous Materials/Wastes: Social Aspects of Facility Planning and Management, Toronto (2 October).

  • Lyon, David: 1994, Rights, Welfare and Mill's Moral Theory(Oxford University Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • McAvoy, Gregory: 1999, ‘Partisan Probing and Democratic Decision Making: Rethinking the Nimby Syndrome’, Policy Studies Journal 26(2), 274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macpherson, C. B.: 1977, The Life and Times of Liberal Democracy(University Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, Robert: 1991, The Philosopher's Dictionary(Broadview Press, Peterborough, Ontario).

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, Michael, J. T. Stevenson and Wesley Cragg: 1992, Finding a Balance of Values: An Ethical Assessment of Ontario Hydro's Demand/Supply Plan. Report to the Aboriginal Research Coalition of Ontario (November).

  • McGee, Kelly D.: 1991, ‘Overcoming “NIMBY” in Municipal Waste Management Planning’, in Ed Murray E, Haight (ed.), Municipal Solid Waste Management: Making Decisions in the Face of Uncertainty(University of Waterloo Press, Waterloo, Ontario).

    Google Scholar 

  • Maclean, Anne: 1993, The Elimination of Morality: Reflections on Utilitarianism and Bioethics(Routledge, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • MacNiven, C. David: 1982, The Moral Question: Ethical Theory(TV Ontario).

    Google Scholar 

  • McCracken, G.: 1988. The Long Interview(Sage Publications, United States).

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R., M. Fiske and P. Kendall: 1990, The Focused Interview: A manual of Problems and Procedures, 2nd ed. (Free Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, John Stuart: 1910, Utilitarianism Liberty and Representative Government(J.M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Morell, David and Christopher Magorian: 1982, Siting Hazardous Waste Facilities: Local Opposition and Myth of Preemption(Ballinger Publishing Company, Cambridge, Massachusette).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieves, Leslie A., Jeffery J. Himmelberger, Samuel J. Ratick and Allen L. White: 1992, ‘Negotiated Compensation for Solid-Waste Disposal Facility Siting: An Analysis of the Wisconsin Experience’, Risk Analysis 12(4).

  • Ontario Government: 1997, Environmental Assessment Act (April 4) (Publications Ontario, Ottawa).

  • Petts, Judith: 1995, ‘Waste Management Strategy Development: A Case Study of Community Involvement and Consensus-building in Hampshire’, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 38(4).

  • Poland, Ronald J.: 1991, ‘The Role of Sanitary Landfill in Future Waste Disposal Strategies’, in Ed Murray E, Haight (ed.), Municipal Solid Waste Management: Making Decisions in the Face of Uncertainty(University of Waterloo Press, Waterloo, Ontario).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pope, Kent: 1999, ‘Europe's Landfill Alternative’, Solid Waste Technologies 13(4), 16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Public Advisory Committee (PAC) Minutes: 1990– 1994, Foley Township Office.

  • Rawls, John: 1971, A Theory of Justice(Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Roper, Jon: 1989, Democracy and its Critics: Anglo-American Democratic Thought in the Nineteenth Century(Unwin Hyman Ltd, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, Bernard: 1993, Ethical Theory: Strategies and Concepts(Mayfield Publishing Company, USA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rueschemeyer, Dietrich: 1998, ‘The Self-Organization of Society and Democratic Rule’, in Dietrich Rueschemeyer, Marilyn Rueschemeyer and Bjorn Wittrock (eds.), Participation and Democracy East and West: Comparisons and Interpretations(M. E. Sharpe, London, England).

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarre, Geoffrey: 1996, Utilitarianism: The Problems of Philosophy(Routledge, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sealon, Donna: 1993, Member-at-Large Public Advisory Committee, interview (March 7th).

  • Shepherd, Anne and Christi Bowler: 1997, ‘Beyond the Requirements: Improving Public Participation in EIA’ Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 40(6), 725.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shikaze, Kim: 1991, ‘Solid Waste Management – Issues, Priorities and Progress’, in Ed Murray E, Haight (ed.), Municipal Solid Waste Management: Making Decisions in the Face of Uncertainty(University of Waterloo Press, Waterloo, Ontario).

    Google Scholar 

  • Steering Committee Meeting (SCM) Minutes: 1990–1994 Foley Township Office.

  • Vesilind, Aarne P. and Eric I. Pas: 1998, ‘Price Effects of Landfills on Different House Value Strata’, Journal of Urban Planning and Development 124(3), 138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. 1994. Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 2nd edition (Sage Publications, California).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McKay, R.B. Consequential Utilitarianism: Addressing Ethical Deficiencies in the Municipal Landfill Siting Process. Journal of Business Ethics 26, 289–306 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006345600415

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006345600415

Navigation