Environmental Ethics 16 (2):135-144 (1994)
|Abstract||Alastair S. Gunn has argued that it is in principle possible to restore degraded natural environments and to restore their full value, provided that species distinctive to them are extant. I argue, first, that the proviso is unnecessary. More importantly, I claim that full value cannot be restored because restored environments lack the relational property of being naturally evolved. I delineate and explain the structure and detail of the theoretical bases for this claim and show that Gunn’s reflections do not rule out the view that full value cannot be restored|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Helena Siipi (2004). Naturalness in Biological Conservation. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (6).
Yeuk-Sze Lo (1999). Natural and Artifactual. Environmental Ethics 21 (3):247-266.
Nathaniel F. Barrett (2011). The Promise and Peril of Ecological Restoration: Why Ritual Can Make a Difference 1. American Journal of Theology and Philosophy 32 (2).
Steven Vogel (2003). The Nature of Artifacts. Environmental Ethics 25 (2):149-168.
Yeuk-Sze Lo (1999). Natural and Artifactual: Restored Nature as Subject. Environmental Ethics 21 (3):247-266.
Ben Ridder (2007). An Exploration of the Value of Naturalness and Wild Nature. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 20 (2).
Don Mannison (1983). Ii. Nature May Be of No Value: A Reply to Elliot. Inquiry 26 (2):233 – 235.
Sheila Lintott (2011). Preservation, Passivity, and Pessimism. Ethics and the Environment 16 (2):95-114.
Alastair S. Gunn (1991). The Restoration of Species and Natural Environments. Environmental Ethics 13 (4):291-310.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads3 ( #201,695 of 548,977 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,511 of 548,977 )
How can I increase my downloads?