Comparing Environmental Value Systems: An IB ESS Dam Example

04 Apr Comparing Environmental Value Systems: An IB ESS Dam Example

In ESS, an environmental value system (EVS) helps explain how a person’s values and assumptions influence their interpretation of an environmental issue and the responses they favour. A useful comparison goes beyond naming a viewpoint: show how different priorities could lead to different decisions about the same problem.

Three broad perspectives

Ecocentric, anthropocentric and technocentric perspectives are useful broad categories for comparison. Real people can hold a mixture of views, and their position may change with the issue or evidence. Do not assume that every member of a community has the same EVS.

• Ecocentric: gives strong importance to ecological relationships and the value of nature, including value beyond direct human use.
• Anthropocentric: places human interests and well-being at the centre of decisions, which can include managing resources and protecting ecosystems for people.
• Technocentric: emphasises the role of technology and innovation in responding to environmental problems.

These descriptions are starting points for analysis. For a fuller introduction, read what an environmental value system means in IB ESS.

Worked example: a proposed hydroelectric dam

Imagine a hypothetical proposal to build a dam for electricity generation. An ecocentric argument might give priority to river connectivity, habitats and the value of the ecosystem. It could oppose the project if those impacts are considered unacceptable.

An anthropocentric argument might compare electricity supply and economic benefits with effects on people living nearby, including displacement or changes in livelihoods. Its conclusion would depend on whose interests are considered and how costs and benefits are distributed.

A technocentric argument might emphasise engineering measures intended to reduce impacts or improve the performance of the project. Those proposed measures would still need evidence about their effectiveness and limitations.

None of these positions can be inferred simply from whether someone supports or opposes the dam. Two people may reach the same decision for different reasons.

Compare reasoning, not just labels

1. Identify the priority. What is valued, and why?
2. Connect it to the decision. Explain how that priority affects the preferred response.
3. Use the same issue. Compare what each perspective says about the dam, rather than switching examples.
4. Discuss a tension. Explain a conflict between priorities or a limitation of a proposed response.

A statement such as “one person values nature and another likes technology” is incomplete. Show what that means for a specific decision and what evidence each argument would need.

An original practice task

Compare two perspectives on the hypothetical dam. Write one paragraph for each, then a short comparison explaining where their reasoning differs and where they might agree. This is a practice exercise, not an official IB question or markscheme.

For wider context, read how local and global scales connect in ESS. Marija Maletz, ESS teacher, examiner and tutor, offers online ESS lessons for SL and HL. You can request a free 20-minute trial lesson to discuss support with concepts and exam responses.