Sustainable land Ethics :
Emerged from conserving, restoring, and managing nature.

The prominent pioneer of this tradition, expressed as the land ethic. The land ethic is powerful because it includes humans as responsible and active members of the community of the land.

Land ethics promote the “integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community.”

Rachel Carson beautifully mentioned land ethics in her Silent Spring as a work of advocacy of the same. However, she actually writes from a foundation of both scientific knowledge and a subtle ethics. She also argues against the dominance of “economism,” or the hegemony of environmental decision making based primarily on money.

Most of the urban ethical systems focus on social justice. That is, they assert the value of equal access to the benefits of urban life by persons of all social groups and economic classes.
In this view, the “right to the city” is a radical phrase suggesting that all citizens should be involved in the processes of urban placemaking or settlements accordingly.
Urban ethics also calls for not relegating marginalized or unempowered populations to the most vulnerable spaces in urban areas.
Nature remains beyond the city limits in much of the thinking about urban ethics.
The chasm between the land ethic and urban social ethics is both large and damaging.
It assumes there is no nature in the city. The recognition of the richness of sometimes inconspicuous ecological functions in cities is Green Infrastructure by restoring ecological structures and processes desire for urban sustainability.
Quality of life depends on sustainable balance jointly among ecological, social, and economic processes in improving the quality of life not only for people but also for nonhuman beings. Sustainability is, at its core, an ethical goal emerging from a fair political process, a goal that requires sound understanding of the role of nature—ecological structures and processes—in and around urban areas.
A combined urban-natural ethic can have several benefits. Some of them are as below :
1. Urban systems that incorporate natural processes and structures may be more attractive than those that lack or hide nature.
2. Quality of life of urban residents—emerging from conditions that are less stressful, more restorative, less susceptible to disturbances, and less vulnerable to effects of climate change—is one outcome of an urban land ethic.
3. Improved quality of life resulting from an urban land ethic can also reduce the pressure for unplanned urban spread and land conversion.
4. Better understanding of the role of natural environmental benefits and vulnerabilities can enhance assessment of environmental inequities and thus promote environmental justice.
So it seems clear that environmental alongwith land ethics is relevant to the urban realm, since cities, suburbs, and exurbs are hybrid social and ecological systems. In such places, environmental ethics complements the social ethics that have emerged from the social sciences, humanities, and social activism. However, an urban land ethic has yet to be articulated.