Robin Attfield refutes the neo-Malthusian paradigm put forward by Holmes Rolston, arguing that authentic development will seldom conflict with nature conservation.
Content Index
Carsten Helm and Udo Simonis develop a proposal for distributing common resources with regard to international climate policy, based on widely accepted equity criteria.
Roger Crisp responds to Dale Jamieson’s views on animal liberation as environmental ethic.
Andrew Vincent examines the economic evaluation of the environment, concluding it is at odds with beliefs based upon objective and intrinsic values.
Dale Jamieson introduces the special issue by highlighting American perspectives on different facets of environmental values. These span spiritual and aesthetic dimensions, moral, political, and religious values, and conflicting values in the climate change debate.
Jonathan Aldred tests aspects of the claim that ocussing
cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is limited in scope, as some things cannot be meaningfully priced. He focuses on problems of incomparability and incommensurability, and compares CBA to rough equality.
This guest editorial takes stock of what was achieved since the UN Conference on Environment and Development at Rio, and speculates on the results of the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg.
The article discusses how far the ecological state can go in pursuing sustainable development without intruding on democratic values. Focussing on social choice mechanisms, it draws the image of the ecological state as a “green fist in a velvet glove.”
Many philosophers consider favoritism toward humans in the context of moral choice to be a prejudice. While several terms are used for it, this article suggests that only the term “speciesism” be used. It attempts conceptual clarification with regard to other terms like “humanistic ethics” or “non-speciesist humanism.”
James P. Sterba offers clarifications to Brian Steverson’s objections to his original reconciliationist argument and notion of intrinsic value.