Rawlsian justice: a philosophical justification for conservation?

The natural environment is commonly managed in order to maximize economic returns; a criterion that is seldom consistent with conservation of nature or natural resources. Yet, it is common for people to claim that conservation constitutes a legitimate constraint on economic returns. More specific...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Sanders, Rebecca
Format: Others
Language:English
Published: 2009
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/2429/8260
id ndltd-UBC-oai-circle.library.ubc.ca-2429-8260
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-UBC-oai-circle.library.ubc.ca-2429-82602018-01-05T17:34:09Z Rawlsian justice: a philosophical justification for conservation? Sanders, Rebecca The natural environment is commonly managed in order to maximize economic returns; a criterion that is seldom consistent with conservation of nature or natural resources. Yet, it is common for people to claim that conservation constitutes a legitimate constraint on economic returns. More specifically, authors commonly apply political theory in support of the claim that it is unjust not to conserve. This thesis evaluates a) the adequacy of particular attempts to justify conservation using applications of John Rawls' A Theory of Justice and b) the general ability of Rawls' framework to support conservation. The theory fails to provide a strong justification of conservation policies and practices because of both questionable efforts to extrapolate from the theory, and certain fundamental limitations of the theory itself. Forestry, Faculty of Graduate 2009-05-26T20:40:30Z 2009-05-26T20:40:30Z 1998 1998-11 Text Thesis/Dissertation http://hdl.handle.net/2429/8260 eng For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use. 3066966 bytes application/pdf
collection NDLTD
language English
format Others
sources NDLTD
description The natural environment is commonly managed in order to maximize economic returns; a criterion that is seldom consistent with conservation of nature or natural resources. Yet, it is common for people to claim that conservation constitutes a legitimate constraint on economic returns. More specifically, authors commonly apply political theory in support of the claim that it is unjust not to conserve. This thesis evaluates a) the adequacy of particular attempts to justify conservation using applications of John Rawls' A Theory of Justice and b) the general ability of Rawls' framework to support conservation. The theory fails to provide a strong justification of conservation policies and practices because of both questionable efforts to extrapolate from the theory, and certain fundamental limitations of the theory itself. === Forestry, Faculty of === Graduate
author Sanders, Rebecca
spellingShingle Sanders, Rebecca
Rawlsian justice: a philosophical justification for conservation?
author_facet Sanders, Rebecca
author_sort Sanders, Rebecca
title Rawlsian justice: a philosophical justification for conservation?
title_short Rawlsian justice: a philosophical justification for conservation?
title_full Rawlsian justice: a philosophical justification for conservation?
title_fullStr Rawlsian justice: a philosophical justification for conservation?
title_full_unstemmed Rawlsian justice: a philosophical justification for conservation?
title_sort rawlsian justice: a philosophical justification for conservation?
publishDate 2009
url http://hdl.handle.net/2429/8260
work_keys_str_mv AT sandersrebecca rawlsianjusticeaphilosophicaljustificationforconservation
_version_ 1718587918048559104