David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Environmental Ethics 29 (4):389-401 (2007)
How do we weigh the claims of current and future people when current exercise of rights to property conflict with sustainability? Are property rights over theseresources more limited due to the claims of posterity? Lockean property rights allow no right to degrade resources when doing so threatens the basic needs offuture generations. A stewardship conception of property rights can be developed, providing a justification for sustainable management legislation even whensuch law conflicts with the rights an owner would have, were the resource under more full-blown ownership. A protection indicator can be developed that is sensitive to a range of empirical factors such as scarcity, renewability, importance of the resource, and seriousness and reversibility of potential harm. The stewardship conception of rights over environmental resources can be applied in policy settings, for example, in decisions over emissions limits and land-use patterns. Such harnessing of Lockean intuitions to argue for environmental protection is in sharp contrast to Locke’s usual employment by those keen to show that such protection violates owners’ rights
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
M. L. J. Wissenburg (2011). Parenting and Intergenerational Justice: Why Collective Obligations Towards Future Generations Take Second Place to Individual Responsibility. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (6):557-573.
Similar books and articles
J. M. Elegido (1995). Intrinsic Limitations of Property Rights. Journal of Business Ethics 14 (5):411 - 416.
Larry May (1986). Corporate Property Rights. Journal of Business Ethics 5 (3):225 - 232.
Scott Wisor (2012). Property Rights and the Resource Curse: A Reply to Wenar. Journal of Philosophical Research 37:185-204.
Gillian Brock (1998). Future Generations, Natural Resources, and Property Rights. Ethics and the Environment 3 (2):119-130.
Kristin S. Shrader-Frechette (1988). Agriculture, Ethics, and Restrictions on Property Rights. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 1 (1):21-40.
Peter Vallentyne (2001). Self-Ownership. In Laurence Becker & Charlotte Becker (eds.), Encyclopedia of Ethics, 2nd edition. Garland Publishing
Murray Hofmans-Sheard (2005). Preserving Common Rights Within Private Property. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 12 (2):3-9.
Rowan Cruft (2006). Against Individualistic Justifications of Property Rights. Utilitas 18 (2):154-172.
L. Wenar (1998). Original Acquisition of Private Property. Mind 107 (428):799-820.
Robert E. Goodin (1990). Property Rights and Preservationist Duties. Inquiry 33 (4):401 – 432.
Thomas A. Horne (1994). Liberalism and the Problem of Poverty: A Reply to Ashcraft. Critical Review 8 (3):427-434.
Hugh Breakey (2010). Natural Intellectual Property Rights and the Public Domain. Modern Law Review 73 (2):208-239.
Hugh Breakey (2009). Liberalism and Intellectual Property Rights. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 8 (3):329-349.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads22 ( #170,714 of 1,796,251 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #349,760 of 1,796,251 )
How can I increase my downloads?