Can there be an input from philosophical debates on a better use of nature? Towards an improvement of nature rights in environmental economics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ef.345881Keywords:
Rights to nature, institutions, discourses on public assignmentAbstract
This contribution will deal with granting rights to nature. We will define rights of nature as a social process of creating institutions which are linked to philosophical discourses on perceptions of nature. The idea is to use different narratives in order to understand how rights of nature have been and can be accomplished/derived by humans. Then we will give hints for future directions of right detection embedded in eco-systems. We will specifically focus on the right derivation needed for contracting with nature. We take the beaver, the wolf and the black tern as examples and generalize on case specific findings. All of them need habitats and landscapes in which they can live. The message is that landscapes and habitats are part of rights of nature and that they must be also addressed beyond individual species. Additionally, we will use different strains of thought to get hints on a practical establishing of rights of nature.
Downloads
References
Anderson-Gold. S. (2001). Unnecessary evil. History and moral progress in the theory of Kant. State University of New York Press.
Binmore, K. (2005). Nature justice. Oxford. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:o so/9780195178111.001.0001
Bromley, D. W. (2006). The economic dynamics of environmental law. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 88(3), 770–771. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 8276.2006.00895_3.x
Bromley, D.W. (2012). Environmental governance as stochastic belief updating crafting rules to live by. Ecology and Society, 17(3), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-04774-170314
Dorresteijn, I., Milcu, A. J., Leventon, J., Hanspach, J. & Fischer Ambio, J. (2016). Social factors mediating human–carnivore coexistence: understanding thematic strands influencing coexistence in Central Romania. AMBIO A Journal of the Human Environment, 45(4), 490-500.
Gamborg, C. (2001). Sustainability and biodiversity: ethical perspectives on forest management (PhD. Thesis). University of Copenhagen. http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/13035957/Christian_Gamborg.pdf#page=146
Hanna, S., Folke K. & Mäler, G. (1996). Rights to nature: culture, ecological economics, political principles of institutions for the environment. Island Press.
Krauss, W. (2006). The natural and cultural landscape heritage of Northern Friesland. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 11(1), 39-52.
Libecap, G. D. (1990). Contracting for property rights. In: T. L. Anderson & F. S. McChesney (Ed.), Property rights: cooperation, conflict and law (pp. 142-167). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511664120
Lauer, C. (2016). Confronting the anthropocene: Schelling and Lucretius on receiving nature’s gift. Journal of Comparative and Continental Philosophy, 8(2), 160-179. https://doi.org /10.1080/17570638.2016.1200317
Lustig, B. A. (1991). Natural law, property, and justice: the general justification of property in John Locke. The Journal of Religious Ethics, 19(1) 119-149.
Marsden, T. & Smith, E. (2005). Ecological entrepreneurship: sustainable development in local communities through quality food production and local branding. Geoforum, 36(4), 440-451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2004.07.008
McIntosh, D. (2010). The transhuman security dilemma. Journal of Evolution and Technology, 21(2), 32-48.
Meriggi, A. & Lovari, S. (1996). A review of wolf predation in southern Europe: does the wolf prefer wild prey to livestock? Journal of Applied Ecology, 33(6), 1561-1571. https://doi. org/10.2307/2404794
Moline, J. N. (1986). Aldo Leopold and the moral community. Environmental Ethics, 8(2), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.5840/enviroethics19868222
Nash, R. F. (1989). The rights of nature: a history of environmental ethics. Madision.
Prasad, B. C. & Tisdell, C. (1996). Getting property rights “right”: land tenure in Fiji. Pacific
Economic Bulletin, 11(1), 31-39.
Quilley, S. (2009). The land ethic as an ecological civilizing process: Aldo Leopold, Norbert Elias, and Environmental Philosophy. Environmental Ethics, 31(2), 115-134. https://doi. org/10.5840/enviroethics200931215
Raftopoulos, M. & Powska, R. (Eds.). (2017). Natural resource development and human rights in Latin America: state and non-state actors in the promotion and opposition to extractivism activities. Denmark. https://vbn.aau.dk/ws/files/291002023/Nat_Res_ Dev_and_HR.pdf
Serres, M. (1995). The natural contracts. An Arbor. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.9725
Schleupner, C. & Link, P. M. (2008). Potential impacts on important bird habitats in Eiderstedt (Schleswig-Holstein) caused by agricultural land use changes. Applied Geography, 28(4), 237-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2008.04.001
Schüßler, R. (2000). Zur konvergenz von moral und eigeninterresse. In: K. Hammacher, I. Reimers- Tovote, M. Walter (Eds.),
Zur aktualität der ethikc spinozas. Schriftenreihe der Spinoza gesellschaft. Bd.7 (pp. 212-239). Würzburg.
Reimers-Tovote, M. Walter (Eds.), Zur aktualität der ethikc spinozas. Schriftenreihe der Spinoza gesellschaft. Bd.7 (pp. 212-239). Würzburg.
Sheldrake, R. (1996). The rebirth of nature: the greening of science and God. Rochester. Smith, H. E. (2002). Exclusion versus governance: two strategies for delineating property rights.
The Journal of Legal Studies, 31(2), 453-487. https://doi.org/10.1086/344529
Spaemann, R & Loew, R. (2005). Natuerliche ziele. Geschichte und wiederentdeckung des teleologischen denkens. Klett Cotta.
Spangenberg, J. H., van Haaren, C., Settele, J. (2014). The ecosystem service cascade: further
developing the metaphor. Integrating societal processes to accommodate social processes and planning, and the case of bioenergy. Ecological Economics, 104, 22-32. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.04.025
Steppacher, R. & Gerber, J. F. (2012). Meanings and significance of property with reference to today’s three major eco-institutional crisis. In: J. F. Gerber & R. Steppacher (Eds.), Towards an integrated paradigm in heterodox economics. Alternative approaches to the current eco-social crisis (pp. 111-123). Palgrave. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230361850_6
Stoynov, E. & Peschev, H. (2014). Reintroduction of griffon vulture gyps fulvus in kresna Gorge of Struma River. Annual Report 2013. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/ Emilian_Stoynov/publication/269691140_Re-introduction_of_Griffon_Vulture_ Gyps_fulvus_in_Kresna_Gorge_of_Struma_River_Bulgaria_Annual_Report_2013/ links/5491b95f0cf269b048616b49.pdf
Tozer, D.C., Steele, O. & Gloutney, M. (2018). Multispecies benefits of wetland conservation for marsh birds, frogs, and species at risk. Journal of Environmental Management, 212, 160-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.01.055
van der Winden, J. & van Horssen, P.W. (2008). A population model for the black tern Chlidonias niger in West-Europe. Journal of Ornithology, 149, 487–494. 10.1007/s10336-008-0292-z
Xiang, W.-N. (2014). Doing real and permanent good in landscape and urban planning: ecological wisdom for urban sustainability. Landscape and Urban Planning, 121, 65–69. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.09.008
Yang, B. & Li, S. (2016). Design with nature: Ian McHarg’s ecological wisdom as actionable and practical knowledge. Landscape and Urban Planning, 155, 21–32. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.04.010
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Estudios de Filosofía
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term "Work" shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher a nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoCommercia-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0), or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions: (a) Attribution: Other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;(b) Noncommercial: Other users (including Publisher) may not use this Work for commercial purposes;
4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal;
5. Authors are permitted, and Estudios de Filosofía promotes, to post online the preprint manuscript of the Work in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work is expected be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Estudios de Filosofía's assigned URL to the Article and its final published version in Estudios de Filosofía.
