[Explainer Series] Environmental Ethics and Ecofeminism: Pathways to Sustainability and Food Security

Ethics is a branch of philosophy; it is the study of problems and principles associated with the relationships that humans have with the physical environment. It comprises a field of applied ethics, which plays a significant role in shaping the principles that influence human lifestyles, choices, and policies pertaining to various environmental problems. Popular discourse on environmental ethics includes theories of both normative ethics and meta-ethics, along with the adequacy of ecofeminist, holist, and individualist worldviews. At its core, environmental ethics is about imagining a better future for those to come and fostering good relations between humans and non-human entities. Its scope is broad and includes the interpretation of the precautionary principle, sustainable development policies, biodiversity policies, and the extent of human obligations in responding to the global climate crisis. Fundamentally, environmental ethics asks two questions: What responsibility do humans have to the environment, and why? This article will briefly overview central ecological ethics and how they could influence environmental health. Moreover, I will discuss how ecofeminism can be used to tackle food scarcity.

The first foundation of environmental ethics was religious philosophy. A call for respect for rivers, animals, and ecosystems can be found in most religions. The second half of the 20th century saw an evolution in environmental ethics. Environmental concerns took center stage due to the rapid increase in population, environmental degradation, and the resource scarcity crisis. However, it was challenging for scholars to agree on a universal environmental ethic in the modern world. Inequalities in society, nations, and regions—as well as the right to access basic resources for survival—posed significant challenges in designing inclusive environmental ethics. This is why there are different perspectives on ecological ethics and why various approaches to environmental ethics have emerged.

The different approaches to environmental ethics are either atomistic (individual-centered) or holistic (earth-centered). Within these two categories, we find three main environmental worldviews: egocentric, anthropocentric, and biocentric. The egocentric worldview centers on human interests and profit over the environment. According to this view, only the individual has intrinsic value, while other humans and nature have merely instrumental value. Furthermore, the primary motivation for action is the pursuit of personal profit. This worldview negatively impacts environmental health because it does not recognise the value of the natural environment. Similarly, the anthropocentric worldview is based on the idea that only humans have intrinsic value and that nature is only valuable insofar as it serves human needs. Nature has instrumental value, and humans are seen as superior beings who may rule over the earth as its “masters.”

On the other end of the spectrum, holistic worldviews such as biocentrism argue that humans have a serious responsibility to care for the natural environment. Based on this, environmental problems can be solved through innovation and technological development. Furthermore, the survival of humans on Earth depends on their ability to support the ecosystems that, in turn, support human life. This worldview is more conducive to environmental health because it recognises the importance of environmental management. However, a core assumption of this worldview is that economic growth has limitless potential and that continued development for human benefit is always encouraged. This contradicts the fact that economic growth thus far has often been unsustainable—thereby putting the environment at risk for the sake of development.

Ecofeminism is commonly understood as a theory about the intersection of feminism and environmentalism, or the link that joins women and nature. However, ecofeminism goes further, approaching complex issues of environmental degradation and social justice. Its premise is that the way we treat nature and the way we treat one another are inextricably linked. Val Plumwood wrote a comprehensive ecofeminist philosophical critique, arguing that the oppression of both human beings and the natural environment stems from a system of hierarchical dualisms that lie at the center of Western cultures, originating from Platonic philosophy. This differs from the argument—put forward by Marxist scholars and radical feminists—that human suffering and environmental degradation can be traced to one overarching system, namely anthropocentrism, capitalism, and patriarchy. Plumwood argues that the treatment of women in the West is politically, economically, and symbolically associated with the treatment of the environment.

Food scarcity and hunger are problems that can be partly addressed by supporting women as farmers and tillers of the soil. Up to 90% of meals in the world are prepared by women, yet men and boys are often prioritised over women when meals are distributed. This contributes to the undernutrition that disproportionately affects women and girl children. For nutrition to qualify as good, it must be sufficient in quantity, diverse in variety, and supported by proper healthcare and adequate care. Although women are more vulnerable to malnutrition, they are currently positioned to be significant changemakers in the fight against hunger due to their roles as the majority growers, processors, and preparers of food. By giving women greater access to land for agricultural purposes and equipping them with modern tools for sustainable—not merely subsistence—farming, food scarcity and hunger could be effectively addressed, particularly in developing countries.

Most importantly, giving female farmers access to credit or loans to grow community gardens would also improve food security. Ecofeminism encourages collaboration, and if women were funded to feed not just their families but also their communities, hunger could be reduced. Furthermore, these community gardens would operate on sustainable principles, promoting sustainable agriculture (SDG 2). In conclusion, by integrating ethical reflection with actionable strategies—especially those rooted in justice and collaboration—we can envision and work towards a future that supports both people and the planet.

Moliehi Mafantiri is a registered Candidate EAP and an environmental scientist interested in climate policy. She writes this in her capacity as the Supporting Contact Point, LCOY South Africa 2025, representing the Global Shapers Community: Tshwane Hub.