Table of Content

 

1. Objective………………………………………………………………………….     1
2. Introduction……………………………………………………………………..     1
3. Deontological Ethics………………………………………………………..     1
4. Teleological Ethics……………………………………………………………     3
5. Situational Ethics……………………………………………………………..    5
6. Planning Ethic Practice in Nepal………………………………………    6
7. Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………….     6
8. Reference………………………………………………………………………….     7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.    Objective

• To know the different types of ethics in Urban Planning.
• To find out the practical implication of theory “Planning Ethics” in Nepalese context

2.    Introduction

The English word ethic comes from the Greek word ethos which means "custom, habit, usage." The ethic may be defined as the moral standards based on moral duties and virtues. It is the system of moral principles governing the appropriate conduct for an individual, profession or group. It is interesting to decide that whether something is ethical or not? People make ethical decisions in a number of ways, e.g. Gut-feeling, Reason, Conscience, Consensus, Consequences, Relativism and Authority etc. Ethical theory makes recommendations about the process which should be followed in deriving and justifying ethical principles and arriving at ethical conclusion.

Awareness of the enormous complexity involved in establishing an acceptable ethical framework has led to the development of different approaches. There are different types of approaches which are used in practice.

Traditionally, ethical systems have been categorized into one of three main categories:

• Deontological ethics
• Teleological ethics
• Situational ethics

 

3.    Deontological Ethics

From the Greek deon meaning right or obligation: The rationality of moral obligation. Deontological theories hold that actions are right or wrong to the extent that they are fulfillment of duty. Deontological theories differ as to the grounds of duty, i.e. God, rationality. Simply put the deontological method holds that some things are always and everywhere morally wrong and other things are always and everywhere morally right. Morality is defined in terms of moral obligation (Kant). Good things are not done because they will produce good results but because these things are right in and of themselves. Deontological systems are based on the idea that human beings must treat other human beings with respect and dignity. They are, therefore, opinion-based, this theories is also called rule based ethics.

In a 'Deontological' system of ethics the consequences of an action are generally irrelevant to moral assessment. Rather, morality comes about from a rational agent's recognition of its duties toward others. These duties can be grounded in different ways, from divine revelation to objective rational principles.

Deontology can be divided into two main types:

1. Act Deontological Theories (which include)
1. Situational Ethics (sometimes referred to as a prima facie Imperative Theory), and
2. Existentialism
2. Rule Deontological Theories (which include)
1. Categorical Imperative Theories (i.e., Kantian Ethics) and
2. Divine Command Theories

While each type of Deontological theory finds the locus of our moral obligations in different places, they all contend that 'goodness' resides in our ability to recognize and keep moral obligations; the consequences of our actions are of only secondary concern, if at all.

Problems with this approach:

• Which human rights are deemed more important?
• As society evolves over time, will norms of basic human rights change?
• Blindly following this approach could lead to considerable harm.

Examples of Deontological Ethics:

• Declaration of Independence
• Choosing not to disseminate false information because that would constitute an act of lying which is "wrong."

        fig 1.

4.    Teleological Ethics

From telos, the end or the goal. Actions are judged to be morally good if they achieve a good goal or outcome. Teleological ethics systems take on a results-oriented approach and are often referred to as "utilitarian." Teleological ethics are utilitarian in that they seek to arrive at ethical decisions on the basis of a projected outcome that would bring about the most good for the greatest number of people. The teleological approach abandons any claim to moral certainty.

There are no absolute moral standards in utilitarian ethics as the 4 principles of autonomy, beneficence; non-malfeasance and justice are all situation-dependent and therefore relative. Subjectivity reigns supreme.

Utilitarian thinking gradually became established in the west during the course of the 20th century, replacing the previous generally deontological ethical thinking. This may have been because of a general decline in the belief that there is a God with objective moral standards.

Problems with this approach:

• How can you calculate greatest good?
• Won't you have to act before you can determine the outcome?

Positives of this approach:

• Requires a consideration of all alternatives.
• Requires a practitioner to think about the consequences of their actions.

Examples of teleological ethics:

• The suggestion that public relations should serve the public interest.
• Making choices not based solely on financial considerations.

 

 fig 2.0

Utilitarian thinking

 

Utilitarian thinking gradually became established in the west during the course of the 20th century, replacing the previous generally deontological ethical thinking. This may have been because of a general decline in the belief that there is a God with objective moral standards.

 

Utilitarianism is an effort to provide an answer to the practical question "What ought a man to do?" Its answer is that he ought to act so as to produce the best consequences possible. In the notion of consequences the Utilitarian includes all of the good and bad produced by the act, whether arising after the act has been performed or during its performance.

 

As an abstract ethical doctrine, Utilitarianism has established itself as one of the small numbers of live options that must be taken into account and either refuted or accepted by any philosopher taking a position in normative ethics. In contemporary discussion it has been divorced from adventitious involvements with the analysis of ethical language and with the psychological theory with which it was presented by Bentham. Utilitarianism now appears in various modified and complicated formulations.

 

 

Nevertheless, this is the popular ethical thinking all over the world, there are some common criticisms. They are:

 

1. Distastefulness 

Utilitarianism runs into problems when sentiment is involved. Utilitarianism is alleged to be faulty in the way it requires us to think about all kinds of actions - to apply the felicific calculus in disregard to any feared distaste of the result. For example, some issues or potential actions are (to a non-utilitarian) "morally unthinkable":

 

2. Impossibility

The second most common criticism of utilitarianism is that it is impossible to apply - that happiness (etc) cannot be quantified or measured, that there is no way of calculating a trade-off between intensity and extent, or intensity and probability (etc), or comparing happiness to suffering.

 

3. Impracticality

The third most common criticism is that it is too difficult to apply - that we cannot calculate all the effects for all the individuals

 

4. Insufficiency

One argument which some people propose as being more sensible than other criticisms, is that utilitarianism is "fine, so far as it goes", but that it fails to consider some sources of value, and that it will therefore produce the wrong results when these different sources conflict.

 

 

 

 

5.    Situational Ethics

Sometimes referred to as "contextualism" or "relational ethics". Situational ethics suggests that decision-making should be seen as independent of specific circumstances. Instead of following the same set of rules in each decision, practitioners engaging in Situational ethics decide on a case by case basis.

 

Positives of this approach:

• Can be helpful when there are several conflicting ethical obligations.
• Useful when blindly following rules, as suggested by Deontological systems, would result in considerable harm.

Examples of Situational Ethics in Action:

• Choosing not to comment to the press when releasing the information could result in considerable harm to one's client or the public. The conflicting ethical responsibilities in this instance include honest and prevention of harm.

Comparison of Deontological, Teleological and Situational ethics

 

As the table shows, deontological and utilitarian ethics are antithetical and flawed in different areas. In contrast, situational ethics include the best features of each, while omitting the bad. Deontology and Utilitarianism are two different human ethical systems which imperfectly and incompletely capture different aspects of God's true ethics.

 

6.    Planning Ethic Practice in Nepal

In the Medieval time in Nepal, all the social activities as well as planning activities are guided by the religion. There was homogenous society. Religious truth and beliefs were properly understood. People had great belief in the existence of god. They were afraid to break the religious norms and values and they used to think that there was no way to escape from god. Religious truths were working as the ethics. There was extensive faith in the religious norms and values. The traditional town planning concept “Astamatrica” could be also the result of the religious planning concept.

 

In the passage of time, the society changed into the heterogeneous society. There are significant presences of people from different area, culture and society which have different social, political, economical activities. The heterogeneity made the different belief, norms and values and the same religious ethics can not include the varieties of norms, values of the whole society. There are no common respect to the religious belief; than, the laws, rule and regulations are introduced. In the past decades, the development plans were prepared in the higher level; the planning ethics depends upon the somehow in the mercy of the planners. So it was the major causes of failure of the plans. There was lack of the coordination among the planning and implementation body.

 

In the present, there are numbers of planning theories, conducting the planning activities. The planning ethic governs all the planning processes. Integrated Action Plan (IAP), land pooling, Guided Land Development (GLD), etc. are common planning practice in Nepal. There is maintaining the planning ethics due to the people’s participation, generation of “we feeling” etc.

 

 

7.    Conclusion

From this study we can conclude that, ethic may be defined as the moral standards based on moral duties and virtues. Ethical decision is very important in every planning works.

 

The deontological ethic is the rule based planning ethics.

The teleological ethic is the result based planning ethics.

The utilitarian thinking is growing popularity all over the world.

Ethical planning is the one of the important standard of the planning.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8.    References

http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/Spring02/Holt/deontological.html

http://www.friesian.com/

http://www.sandiego.edu/

http://www.cmfglasgow.org.uk/ethics.htm

Howe, Elizabeth, “Professional Roles and the Public Interest in Planning”

Howe, Elizabeth, “Normative Ethics in Planning”