Environmental Ethics and Management Strategies at Canoe and Kayak Centers in the Tarn

This study on environmental ethics examines the extent to which it influences the intensity and nature of eco-responsible engagement among managers of canoeing and kayaking centers. Based on semi-structured interviews with managers of both nonprofit and for-profit centers, this study helped us understand which form of environmental ethics predominates among managers and identify the actions they implement to promote sustainable development. The results of our study showed that the actions undertaken by managers are driven both by an environmental ethic that is primarily ecocentric and, to a lesser extent, biocentric, as well as by their life experiences, their relationship with the environment, and their conception of sustainable development. Beyond this research, our article aims to raise readers’ awareness of sustainable development, encourage them to reflect on their own behavior, and rethink their way of life.

Introduction

Outdoor sports have become an integral part of our society, with a wide variety of activities available to the general public, whether they are recreational or competitive. These activities are often self-organized and take place outside of club settings in specific natural areas. According to the Ministry of Sports (2013), these new activities have a total of approximately 25 million participants^[1]. As for canoeing and kayaking, the French Canoe-Kayak Federation (FFCK) estimated the number of participants at around 300,000. This figure has grown significantly, reaching 2.5 million participants in 2016^[2]. This enthusiasm for outdoor sports and recreation continues to grow and contributes positively to the vitality of rural areas (Siau, 2007, p. 16). The same is true for the Tarn department in the former Midi-Pyrénées region, where we conducted our survey. This rural region is home to many local assets for outdoor sports, such as the Tarn River that runs through it.

However, the increase in tourist traffic can become a major problem for the environment. In fact, nature is likely the aspect most affected by the growth of tourism today. This can be explained by the construction of facilities, increased waste, and the concentration of tourist flows (François, 2004). This alarming observation must be taken into account by tourism stakeholders, particularly canoe and kayak operators. They must address this now-inevitable environmental challenge in order to continue to justify their business.

This challenge, more commonly referred to as “sustainable development,” is defined by INSEE as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs,” a quote from Gro Harlem Brundtland, Prime Minister of Norway (1987). The Brundtland Report is structured around three core concepts that balance economic, social, and environmental needs. The idea is to organize an economic model that respects natural limits while meeting our needs and ensuring intergenerational equity.

The concept of sustainable development is a rather vague notion and, as a result, open to many interpretations (Chartier, 2004). Stakeholders can thus adopt it in a wide variety of ways. The scientific literature on sustainable development converges on two approaches: the market-based approach, also known as “stakeholder theory,” is defined as “any group or individual that has an influence on the organization” (Bajenaru-Declerck, 2009, p. 81). Widely cited in the specialized literature (Mercier, 2006), it is based on the assumption that businesses are primarily driven by the pursuit of profit. This approach calls on them to account for the impact their actions have on society. The ethical or moral approach, on the other hand, holds that the company must act responsibly for the good of society (Bajenaru-Declerck, 2009). It emphasizes ethics and values. This approach remains marginal in the literature on sustainable development because the moral dimension has not yet been fully integrated into economic analysis. This is why we have chosen to highlight it in our study.

In this paper, we will attempt to understand how managers of canoeing and kayaking clubs decide whether or not to commit to sustainable development and corporate social responsibility (CSR). With this in mind, it is essential to examine the concepts of ethics and values in particular in order to gain a deeper understanding of the decision-making process of these stakeholders. How has the concept of ethics been addressed in the literature? How can we explain the ethical orientation of decisions? To do this, we needed to return to the notion of values as developed by Weber. Indeed, in Weber’s view, values are the primary drivers of human action. He considers that individuals follow their deep-seated convictions when making decisions. For Weber, this “decisionist” conception takes two forms: The first, the ethics of conviction, is based on “not betraying a value, not transgressing a norm” (Hottois, 1996, p. 492). In this ethic, the emphasis is on the fact that values must be honored at all costs and regardless of the consequences. The second, the ethic of responsibility, is defined by “attention to the consequences of one’s actions” (Kuty, 2020, p. 81). It holds that one must consider the effectiveness of the means and the actions to be taken, as they may have consequences. In this article, we will explore how these concepts can help explain the choices made by leaders of canoe-kayak clubs, particularly regarding the eco-responsible initiatives they decide to implement.

Furthermore, Larrère (2006, 2008, 2018) drew inspiration from Weber’s work to develop the concept of environmental ethics, while placing particular emphasis on nature, living entities, biology, and ecology. The notion of environmental ethics has its origins in the environmental crisis of the 1960s. This period marked the emergence of the first reflections on economic and technological growth and the depletion of natural resources (Ibid.). The concept of ethics suggests “a normative control of our activities in nature” (Ibid.). According to Larrère, two types of environmental ethics can coexist: biocentric ethics and ecocentric ethics.

Biocentric ethics holds that “every living entity, whatever it may be, employs complex strategies to sustain its existence and reproduce: it exploits its environment for its own benefit; for itself, it is an end in itself and, as such, deserves respect. Since this ethics assigns moral value to every living entity, it has been called biocentric ” (Larrère, 2006, p. 82). This biocentric morality is a deontological morality based on respect for nature and the protection of species, and tends to impose restrictive prohibitions (the “hands-off” principle). It can be likened to Weber’s ethics of conviction.

“Ecocentric ethics holds that it is because we are part of the same community of living beings—or the same biotic community—that we have duties both toward its members (the entities that comprise it) and toward the community as a whole. This is why it is called ecocentric” (Larrère, 2006, p. 82). It presupposes the idea that we could have developed moral feelings of belonging and closeness between human beings and the biotic community. This ethics relates to the “Land Ethic” works^[3]by Aldo Leopold, who is considered the founder of ecocentric ethics. Ecocentric ethics is consequentialist in the sense that it is based on the effects produced on the biotic community. It advocates values of good practices toward nature and allows for a combination of both respect for the members of the community and the responsibility of those within it (Larrère, 2006). It differs from biocentric ethics in that it helps define humanity’s place in nature (Ibid.). It can propose models of action and behavior to harmoniously integrate human activities into the natural environment. Unlike biocentric ethics, here, actors may interact with the natural environment and leave a mark or footprint of their presence, provided that the environment is respected.

We therefore believe that Larrère’s concept of environmental ethics will help us understand the forms of commitment exhibited by these stakeholders. This article will thus attempt to examine the extent to which the environmental ethics of canoe-kayak center managers influence the nature of their commitment to sustainable development. We can hypothesize that business or association leaders working in the outdoor sports sector have a highly developed environmental awareness. However, one might imagine that this leads them to attempt to reconcile their business with actions aimed at protecting nature, which would be more in line with an eco-centric ethic.

Methodology

To understand the values and environmental ethics of the managers of canoeing and kayaking centers on the Tarn River, we used qualitative data collection methods. Olivier De Sardan explains, in particular, that “the perceptions of local actors are an indispensable element of any understanding of social phenomena” and, as a result, it is necessary to “account for the actor’s perspective” (1995, p. 6).

Four semi-structured interviews, lasting between 40 minutes and 1 hour and 10 minutes, were conducted with service providers based at canoeing and kayaking centers along the Tarn River. Given the diversity of the canoeing and kayaking community (FFCK), we chose to diversify the profiles of the interviewees based on the type of facility they manage (FFCK-affiliated association, multi-activity association, and small business).

The study sample consists of four men: a leader of an association affiliated with the FFCK, a leader of an association directly affiliated with the FFCK (the Tarn Departmental Canoe-Kayak Committee—CDCK), a small business owner, and his son, who is expected to take over the family business soon.

Table 1: Survey Sample

The interviews were conducted remotely by telephone due to the health crisis (COVID-19). Four main topics were addressed: the executives’ backgrounds, how their organizations operate, the executives’ environmental ethics, and their views on sustainable development. The interviews were transcribed in full for analysis, and we assigned an anonymous first name to each of the executives interviewed.

Environmentally responsible initiatives influenced by executives' connection to nature

The Diverse Backgrounds of Entry-Level Canoe and Kayak Coaches

Table 2: The Career Paths of Executives

As shown in Table 2, the managers of the canoe-kayak clubs all have different educational backgrounds, ranging from a vocational high school diploma to a master’s degree. Each has practiced canoeing and kayaking, but at different levels. Luc (CDCK) is the only one who had professional experience in the field of canoeing and kayaking before becoming a manager. In terms of degrees, none of the managers holds a degree in organizational management. However, Yvon, Luc, and Corentin have obtained certifications that qualify them to coach canoeing and kayaking (BE, BPJEPS).

The relationship with nature among leaders of canoe and kayak clubs

Leaders’ relationship with nature is central to the concept of environmental ethics. Indeed, based on their relationship with nature and their own values, leaders will express aspects of their environmental ethics. Thus, respect for nature, the protection of species, and the implementation of restrictions to protect the environment will be associated with a more biocentric ethic. Meanwhile, the pleasure of contemplating nature, the role of nature in canoeing and kayaking, the implementation of good environmental practices, and the emphasis on ecological consequences will be parameters representative of an ecocentric ethic.

Our findings show that managers of canoeing and kayaking centers view nature as essential, though to varying degrees. Indeed, Yvon believes that we must not pollute it and emphasizes the civic aspect of sustainable development. Meanwhile, Jean Pierre, Corentin, and Luc protect and respect nature because they say they are aware of how closely nature is linked to their canoeing and kayaking activities. The managers also work to raise customers’ awareness about environmental respect and contribute, in their own way, to sustainable development.

 When it comes to the wildlife found at the training sites, the leaders are unanimous in their agreement that animal species must be protected.

“It’s very important to raise awareness about species, especially because it’s a chain. If one link in the chain breaks, the whole thing breaks. That’s the natural cycle. And we have to be mindful of what we do and the consequences it can have, and I think that through our activities, we’re in the best position to raise awareness about this.”

(Corentin, future executive)

Because of the special connection to nature, all the managers chose to work at a canoeing and kayaking center. However, the social aspect of canoeing and kayaking was also a factor in their decision. Indeed, interacting with customers, a sense of community, and the joy of teaching are essential and rewarding elements for the managers:

 “Don’t forget that the customer—the person—is what matters most. You have to give them the very best you have so they’ll want to come back and have a good time. That’s what counts.”

(Jean Pierre, owner of a small business)

Luc, a club leader (CDCK), stands out in interviews for the special emphasis he places on human relationships. In fact, for him, the social aspect of canoeing and kayaking goes beyond the environmental aspect and is the most important element of his work. He explains his choice by pointing to the highly social nature of the activity, particularly with tourists:

“We meet some wonderful people […] in the valley—all the seasonal workers—and those human connections are worth their weight in gold.”

(Luc, CDCK)

In our study, we also identified a connection to Aldo Leopold’s ecocentric ethics, which centers on the concept of “environmental aesthetics” and advocates for the preservation of the environment’s beauty (Larrère, 2018). Indeed, for the association leaders (Yvon and Luc), nature evokes an aesthetic aspect that “will or will not appeal ” to customers.

For business owners Jean Pierre and Corentin, canoeing and kayaking are directly connected to nature:

“If there is no nature, there is no environment.”

(Luc, multi-activity organization)

Jean Pierre and Corentin (the company) view the local flora and fauna as essential to the canoeing and kayaking experience. This adds a unique and enjoyable aspect to the activity:

“We’ve got beavers in the area now; I saw one the other day while I was out paddleboarding, and it was really cool.”

(Corentin, future business leader)

As for values, we have observed that Jean Pierre (company) and Luc (CDCK) seem to act primarily in accordance with their moral values:

“My own conviction. The fact that I respect the environment and am aware that the environment is also our workplace.”

(Luc, CDCK)

While Yvon (a multi-activity organization) and Corentin (a business) seem to act not only in accordance with their values but also with an eye toward the future, and consider the consequences of their actions.

But in practical terms, how do these values translate into action?

The implementation of sustainable development initiatives by leaders at canoe and kayak clubs

Here, we have examined how leaders approach sustainable development. We have observed many similarities:

For Luc (CDCK) and Jean Pierre (business), sustainable development is about the impact of our actions on the natural environment where we practice our sport. According to them, it is important to consider the consequences of our actions on nature. This implies limiting the ecological impact of canoeing and kayaking. Yvon (multi-activity association) and Corentin (small business) take into account the future dimension of sustainable development. They are developing a long-term vision and say they are aware of the need to preserve the environment for “future generations.”

However, we noted some differences in their views on sustainable development. In fact, Yvon (a multi-activity association) is the only leader to mention constraints and rules that must be followed.

For Jean Pierre (business), sustainable development is “human and psychological.” In his view, “sustainable development continues to pollute, ” and “the good conscience of sustainable development is sustainable, but I’m not quite sure in what sense.” He thus highlights the contradictions inherent in the concept and takes a critical stance toward it. He even prefers to speak of “degrowth” rather than sustainable development.

While the nature of the executives’ commitment is similar, there are some subtle differences in their approaches. All executives have recognized the importance of engaging in sustainable development initiatives. Environmental preservation was a central theme in each of our interviews. We also observe that all executives are carrying out awareness-raising initiatives. We also note the willingness of all executives to commit to sustainable development in order to “preserve” nature. However, we find that their reasons for committing are very personal. Indeed, it is worth noting that Yvon’s commitment (multi-activity association) is civic in nature. According to him, we must not litter or pollute nature. He specifically speaks of “simple actions” and “civic actions” that should be “the norm for everyone .”

Luc (CDCK) stands out for the hedonistic aspect of his commitment to sustainable development: “It’s my passion,” but also for his deep convictions:

“My own conviction. The fact that I respect the environment and am aware that the environment is also our workplace.”

(Yvon and Luc, nonprofit leaders)

Yvon and Luc both emphasize the sporting reasons that motivate them to get involved. For example, the spirit of respect within the APPN, as well as their passion for the sport and the community in which they play it. In contrast, business leader Jean Pierre speaks of a “philosophy of life” and “ethics” that define his deep commitment. He thus stands out from other leaders through the harmonious relationship he maintains with nature. However, despite his skepticism regarding the concept of sustainable development, his commitment is very real. It takes shape and is applied on a daily basis through various actions (cleaning the river, recycling old canoes…). Corentin is committed to sustainable development (using eco-friendly products, educational activities to raise awareness about protecting flora and fauna…). For him, it’s simply “the norm .”

Thus, the initiatives that leaders undertake under the banner of sustainable development tend to be similar. In each of the accounts collected, the leaders are unanimous: the primary sustainable development initiative that must be implemented is raising public awareness of environmental issues. However, they more or less all mention limitations on their commitment due to economic constraints.

Thus, it can be said that executives’ life experiences can influence the eco-friendly actions they implement. Indeed, our findings lead us to conclude that their professional backgrounds and the environmental education they have received shape their eco-friendly actions and their relationship with nature.

A dominant eco-centric environmental ethic

With regard to executives’ relationship with nature, our findings showed that their environmental ethics could be biocentric in some cases, but were primarily ecocentric.

In biocentric ethics, we see that all leaders appreciate wild flora and fauna. Yvon (an association leader) and the leaders of the small business, Jean Pierre and Corentin, share a desire to “protect” and “preserve” animal species. This view of the environment aligns with “biocentric ethics,” which are “ethics of respect, deontological ethics” (Larrère, 2006, p. 83).

We also note that Yvon, Jean Pierre, and Corentin support the idea of equality between humans and wildlife. Equality among living beings is a hallmark of biocentric ethics. Luc (an association leader) has a different view regarding the relative importance of humans and animals. He unhesitatingly favors humans. We believe this choice stems from the athletic and social aspects he prioritizes and emphasizes in his work. This could therefore explain his different approach to nature and its protection, as well as the greater importance he places on humans rather than animal species.

Eco-centric ethics, on the other hand, manifests itself among managers as a special connection to nature. Indeed, contact with nature, the beauty of the environment, and the wild and unspoiled nature of the flora and fauna are the factors that most motivate managers to work at a canoe-kayak base. Aldo Leopold (1995) was one of the pioneers of the concept of “environmental aesthetics.” This concept is characterized by a desire to preserve the environment, and more specifically its beauty and aesthetic value. According to Larrère (2018, p. 103), Leopold’s thinking “appeals to the senses of proximity and contact, such as touch or smell, or of immersion, such as hearing. We are no longer outside of nature; we are part of it.” Aldo Leopold’s aesthetic of nature conservation relates to ecocentric environmental ethics (Larrère, 2018).

We also observed that the leaders share this ecocentric ethic, though to varying degrees: Luc (CDCK) associates animal species with a hedonistic aspect that fosters a love of nature, a reverence for wildlife, and the pleasure of observing it while canoeing or kayaking. This pleasure in observing flora and fauna is akin to Leopold’s ecocentric ethic, in which he savors nature and protects it for its aesthetic value. As Luc (CDCK) puts it:

“The role of nature is to be as untouched as possible, as unspoiled as possible, and thus to allow us to contemplate it and admire it in its most natural state.”

Here, the concepts of pleasure and beauty are emphasized.

Jean Pierre (a small business owner) maintains a harmonious relationship with animals and the environment. He regards animals as “our companions.” This term explicitly echoes Leopold’s words: “Man is but a fellow traveler with the other species” (Leopold, 1995, p. 145). Jean Pierre shares “a sense of kinship with other creatures; a desire to live and let live” (Leopold, 1995, p. 145). Yvon (multi-activity association) agrees with the remarks of executive J-P (company) regarding the harmonious relationships to be maintained with animal species. He also emphasizes that : “we are all in the same world and all in the same boat”; in other words, we all live in the same biotic community if we follow Leopold’s ecocentric ethics.

His civic approach to nature aligns with the concept of responsibility. Indeed, the concept of responsibility is central to ecocentric ethics. In fact, “ecocentric ethics is an ethics of good practices, of proper ways of behaving in nature”; in other words, it is a civic ethics (Larrère, 2006, p. 83). Thus, “ecocentric ethics allows us to combine respect for the members of the community and for the community as a whole with the responsibility of those who are part of it” (Larrère, 2006, p. 83). According to this ethics, the leader therefore has a duty of responsibility toward society.

We also noted that all the leaders consider the environmental consequences of their actions. However, the youngest participants—Yvon (volunteer organization) and Corentin (small business)—stand out for their consideration of how their actions will affect the world of tomorrow. This consideration of the future in their actions could be explained by their age. They are more aware of environmental issues than their elders (Labalelle & Saint Pierre, 2010). Furthermore, the assessment of consequences is once again a process related to the eco-centric ethics characterized as consequentialist by Larrère (2010).

With regard to sustainable development initiatives, we have identified several eco-responsible actions that align with biocentric ethics: raising awareness and using labels on equipment are actions that, in a sense, establish prohibitions and limitations in order to protect the environment. Furthermore, these actions may also align with an ecocentric ethic in the sense that leaders have a responsibility to inform and raise awareness among customers about respecting nature (Larrère, 2006). Jean Pierre (business) and Luc (nonprofit) justify their eco-responsible choices and actions through their personal convictions: “a true philosophy of life,” “it’s a matter of ethics.” However, we know that conviction is an element of biocentric ethics, meaning that the individual will act in accordance with their deeply held moral values.

However, the majority of eco-friendly actions align with ecocentric ethics. For example, they include actions inherent to ecocentric ethics: the use of eco-friendly products and optimizing the number of passengers on shuttle buses. These practices require paying attention to the consequences of one’s actions.               Educational activities focused on discovering flora and fauna involve observation and relate to Leopold’s concept of environmental aesthetics. In other words, this refers to ecocentric ethics (Larrère, 2018). Furthermore, recycling canoes, purchasing equipment from local businesses, donating supplies, sorting waste, and cleaning rivers are all actions related to ecocentric ethics. Indeed, they fulfill a duty of responsibility toward the biotic community in which leaders operate (Larrère, 2006).

Thus, an analysis of all these factors leads us to conclude that the managers of canoeing and kayaking centers share a more eco-centric environmental ethic. Consequently, the actions they take are consistently aligned with this ethic.

Ultimately, the life experiences of leaders, their relationship with nature, their environmental ethics, and their definition of sustainable development shape the sustainable development initiatives they implement. They are ecocentric rather than biocentric. “It also appears that their understanding of the concept of sustainable development is limited to the environmental pillar. The economic dimension is highlighted as an obstacle to the development of initiatives, and the social dimension—except when it comes to raising customer awareness—is rarely mentioned” (Sébastien & Brodhag, 2004).

CONCLUSION

Our study shed light on the varying ethical perspectives of canoe and kayak center managers, their understanding of sustainable development, and, building on this understanding, the actions they are committed to implementing. We found that the eco-responsible commitment of canoe and kayak center managers is influenced by and depends on their environmental ethics, their life experiences, their relationship with nature, and their definition of sustainable development.

Biocentric ethics, which are based on professional duty and personal conviction, primarily establish prohibitions and restrict actions affecting nature. While they feature in leaders’ discourse, they appear to play a secondary role. This ethic is too restrictive because it inevitably tends to repeatedly limit leaders’ room for maneuver. Ultimately, it is rarely found among leaders who consider themselves pragmatic and whose goal remains to provide a service and satisfy their customers.

The eco-centric ethics of a consequentialist nature—respectful of the biotic community and attentive to appropriate behavior in nature—largely dominates the discourse of business leaders. It thus implicitly guides their sustainable development initiatives. Furthermore, since economic profitability is a major objective for them, it will necessarily lead them to implement eco-responsible, eco-centric actions in harmony with the natural environment in which they operate. These actions may, however, appear limited to superficial measures (recycling, cleanup, etc.) primarily linked to the environmental pillar of sustainable development, without a more thorough reflection on the balance to be sought among its three dimensions, as suggested by Sébastien & Brodhag (2004). 

Ultimately, our research shows that all decisions made by leaders to commit to sustainable development are inextricably linked to their core values. However, one might wonder to what extent these actions are truly sustainable and how much further we need to go to enable leaders of associations and/or very small businesses to better align their economic activities with the preservation of our environment.

Bibliography

Bajenaru-Declerck, V. (2009). “The Spread of the Concept of Sustainable Development,” Géoéconomie, No. 49, pp. 77–94.

Chartier, Denis. (2004) “The Origins of Semantic Ambiguities in Sustainable Development: A Critical Analysis of the World Conservation Strategy,” Ecology & Politics, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 171–183.

François, H. (2004). Sustainable Tourism: Organizing Tourism in Rural Areas. Journal of Regional and Urban Economics, 1, 57–80

Kuty, O. (2020). Values in the Sociology of Montesquieu and Max Weber. OK Éditeur. doi: 10.3917/oked.kuty.2020.01.

François Labelle, Josée St-Pierre (2010). Institutional, organizational, and individual determinants of SMEs’ sensitivity to sustainable development. 10th CIFEPME, Bordeaux, France. doi: ffhal-01705659f

Larrère, C. (2006). Environmental Ethics. Multitudes, no. 24(1), 75–84. doi:10.3917/mult.024.0075.

Larrère, C. (2010). Environmental Ethics. Natures Sciences Sociétés, vol. 18(4), 405–413.

Larrère, C. (2018). Is There an Aesthetics of Nature Conservation? Nouvelle revue d’esthétique, 22(2), 97–106. doi:10.3917/nre.022.0097.

Leopold, A. (1995). [orig. ed. 1949]. Almanac of a County of Sands, Paris, Aubier.

Mercier, Samuel. (2010). “9. Stakeholder Theory: A Review of the Literature,” in *Deciding with Stakeholders*. La Découverte, pp. 157–172.

Olivier de Sardan, J-P. (1995). “Politics in the Field,” Enquête, 1, 71–109.

Léa Sébastien and Christian Brodhag. (2004). “In Search of the Social Dimension of Sustainable Development,” Sustainable Development and Territories, Issue 3

Siau, V. (2007). Outdoor sports and regional attractiveness. Pour, 194, (2), 13–20. doi: 10.3917/pour.194.0013.

^[1] http://www.sports.gouv.fr/pratiques-sportives/sports-pour-tous/Sport-pour-tous-11069/Sports-de-nature-qu-est-ce-que-c-est/

^[2] https://www.sportsdenature.gouv.fr/canoe-kayak/observation/pratiquants

^[3] Environmental ethics as defined by Aldo Leopold. It can be summed up as “a thing is right when it

aims to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is unjust when it tends to

“the opposite” (Leopold, 1995, p. 283).