Timothy O’Riordan and Andrew Jordan discuss the place of the precautionary principle in contemporary environmental politics, arguing that its future looks promising but not assured.
Andrew Dobson considers the contribution that a biocentric perspective might make to the ethical debate concerning the practice of genetic engineering.
David Sumner and Peter Gilmour discuss the arguments relating to radiation mortality, arguing them to be rooted in a utilitarian system of moral philosophy.
Bartholow, Douglas, and Taylor review the AWARE(TM) software distributed by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).
David Rapport explores what is and what is not implied by the ecosystem health metaphor.
James Nelson considers what kind of normative work might be done by speaking of ecosystems utilizing a “medical” vocabulary—drawing, that is, on such notions as “health,” disease,” and “illness.”
Alastair Macintosh uses Plato and Bacon as yardsticks to consider the British government’s White Paper on science together with government research council reports as a basis for critiquing current science policy and its intensifying orientation, British and worldwide, towards industrial and military development.
Karen Green applies Korsgaard’s distinctions—one between intrinsic and extrinsic value, and the other between having value as an end and having value as a means—to some issues in environmental philosophy.
Avner De-Shalit discusses how the neglect of environmental philosophy in historical discourse of the environmental movement mistakenly identify “political ecology” with right-wing ideologies.
Richard Cookson examines Sagoff’s criticisms of “Four Dogmas of Environmental Economics” (Environmental Values, Winter 1994) and argues that none of them are fatal.
