Already a subscriber? - Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Browse by:



Displaying: 1-16 of 16 documents


news and notes

1. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1

view |  rights & permissions | cited by

from the editor

2. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1

view |  rights & permissions | cited by

features

3. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1
Peter Humphrey

view |  rights & permissions | cited by

news and notes

4. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1

view |  rights & permissions | cited by

features

5. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1
Holmes Rolston, III

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Valuing wildlands is complex. (1) In a philosophically oriented analysis, I distinguish seven meaning levels of value, individual preference, market price, individual good, social preference, social good, organismic, and ecosystemic, and itemize twelve types of value carried by wildlands, economic, life support, recreational, scientific, genetic diversity, aesthetic, cultural syrubolization, historical, characterbuilding, therapeutic, religious, and intrinsic. (2) I criticize contingent valuation efforts to price these values. (3) I then propose an axiological model, which interrelates the multiple levels and types of value, and some principles for wildland management policy.

discussion papers

6. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1
Susan Jane Buck Cox

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The historical antecedents of Garrett Hardin’s “tragedy ofthe commons” are generally understood to lie in the common grazing lands of medieval and post-medieval England. The concept of the commons current in medieval England is significantly different from the modem concept; the English common was not available to the general public but rather only to certain individuals who inherited or were granted the right to use it, and use of the common even by these people was not unregulated. The types and in some cases the numbers of animals each tenant could pasture were limited, based at least partly on a recognition of the limited carrying capacity of the land. The decline of the commons system was the result of a variety of actors having little to do with the system’s inherent worth. Among these factors were widespread abuse of the rules governing the commons, land “reforms” chiefly designed to increase the holdings of a few landowners, improved agricultural techniques, and the effects of the industrial revolution. Thus, the traditional commons system is not an example of an inherently flawed land-use policy, as is widely supposed, but of a policy which succeeded admirably in its time.

news and notes

7. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1

view |  rights & permissions | cited by

discussion papers

8. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1
Michael Mackenzie

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
l examine the motivation issue in our relationship to future generations in light of a specific set of technological practices-those of Chinese hydraulic agriculture. I conclude that these practices appear to embody a “community-bonding” relationship between present and future generations and that such a relationship provides a fruitful perspective on policy.

news and notes

9. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1

view |  rights & permissions | cited by

book reviews

10. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1
Bryan G. Norton

view |  rights & permissions | cited by
11. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1
William Aiken

view |  rights & permissions | cited by
12. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1
Ernest Partridge

view |  rights & permissions | cited by
13. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1
Frederick Ferré

view |  rights & permissions | cited by

comment

14. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1
Gene Spitler

view |  rights & permissions | cited by
15. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1
David Ehrenfeld, Joan G. Ehrenfeld

view |  rights & permissions | cited by

from the editor

16. Environmental Ethics: Volume > 7 > Issue: 1

view |  rights & permissions | cited by