"Sustainability, Human Welfare and Ecosystem Health"
Bryan Norton differs between two types of sustainability definitions, ‘social scientific’ and ‘ecological’ ones, in order to define our moral obligation to act sustainably.
Bryan Norton differs between two types of sustainability definitions, ‘social scientific’ and ‘ecological’ ones, in order to define our moral obligation to act sustainably.
The article explores the possibilities of a new ethic that incorporates the phenomenon of environmental crisis and aims at changing people’s outlooks and behaviour.
Patrick Murphy argues for a new conception of human agency based on culturopoeia and an application of an ecofeminist dialogic method for analysing human-nature relationships.
Richard B. Harris discusses China’s policies in wildlife conservation, particularly with regard to endangered species to suggest that Western criticisms of Chinese utilitarian attitudes are inappropriate, ineffective, and possibly counter-productive.
John S. Akama, Christopher L. Lant, and G. Wesley Burnett use a political-ecological framework in the analysis of the social factors of wildlife conservation in Kenya.
Wilfred Beckerman and Joanna Pasek discuss criticisms of contingent valuation (CV) and allied techniques for estimating the intensity of peoples’ preferences for the environment, concluding that little progress will be made until both sides in the debate recognise what is valid in their opponents’ arguments.
Daniel Holbrook discusses two principles often found in environmental ethics—self-realization and environmental preservation—as two logically independent principles.
Onora O’Neill discusses environmental values and anthropocentrism and speciesism, with reference to obligation-based reasoning.
I.G. Simmons examines the basic thesis that environmental values must spring from the economic relations of human societies.
Mark A. Michael explains why the failure to insist on the distinction between different kinds of equality has led many to believe that egalitarianism generally has counter-intuitive implications, when in fact only one version of egalitarianism has this problem.