Abstract
In this discussion I revisit the animal welfare-environmental ethics debate, including a recent argument by Ian Campbell in this journal, that its underlying values are incommensurable at the level of principle, making them hard to reconcile, even in practice. By relying on the geocentric framework of William Lynn and the capabilities approach of Martha Nussbaum, as well as a place-specific example of wild horse protection policies, I argue that it is possible to balance these competing values. In light of the pervasive presence of non-native animals, as well as habitat loss and other threats to self-sustaining ecosystems, binary choices are fast becoming anachronistic. Case-by-case analyses are necessary in order to assess how to grant equitable consideration to complex claims.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.