The Relevance of Environmental Ethical Theories for Policy Making

Environmental Ethics 24 (2):135-148 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I address the issue of whether differences in ethical theory have any relevance for the practical issues of environmental management and policy making. Norton’s answer, expressed as a convergence hypothesis, is that environmentalists are evolving toward a consensus in policy even though they remain divided regarding basic values. I suggest that there are good reasons for rejecting Norton’s position.I elaborate on these reasons, first, by distinguishing between different forms of anthropocentrism and nonanthropocentrism, second, by contrasting the different goals that anthropocentrists, biocentrists, and ecocentrists set up for environmental policy making, and, lastly, by identifying three important policy areas (population growth, wilderness preservation, and wildlife management) where differences in basic values generate divergent policies.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,031

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Ethics of Advocacy.Ellen M. Maccarone - 2005 - Environmental Philosophy 2 (1):44-53.
A pragmatic reconsideration of anthropocentrism.Eric Katz - 1999 - Environmental Ethics 21 (4):377-390.
A Pragmatic Reconsideration of Anthropocentrism.Eric Katz - 1999 - Environmental Ethics 21 (4):377-390.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
55 (#298,385)

6 months
7 (#491,733)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mikael Stenmark
Uppsala University (PhD)

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references