Environmental Values 4 (2):169 - 179 (1995)
AbstractThis article concentrates on the Jacobs and Daly criticisms (Environmental Values, Spring 1994) of my earlier article in the same journal (Autumn 1994) criticising the concept of 'sustainable development'. Daly and Jacobs agreed with my criticisms of 'weak' sustainability, but defended 'strong' sustainability on the grounds that natural and manmade capital were 'complements' in the productive process and that economists are wrong, therefore, in assuming that they are infinitely substitutable. This article maintains that they are confusing different concepts of 'complementarity' and 'substitutability'. It is also argued that, in fact, they do both sell crucial passes in their defence of strong sustainability without providing any clear criteria for their abandonment of it in certain cases. It is also denied that the fact that environmental services may provide different satisfactions from those obtained from other goods and services elevates it to the status of some over-riding moral value, or that discounting future costs and benefits is 'unfair' to future generations
Similar books and articles
Strong Versus Weak Sustainability: Economics, Natural Sciences, and Consilience.John Gowdy - 2001 - Environmental Ethics 23 (2):155-168.
Beckerman and His Critics on Strong and Weak Sustainability: Confusing Concepts and Conditions.M. S. Common - 1996 - Environmental Values 5 (1):83 - 88.
Capital Substitutability and Weak Sustainability Revisited: The Conditions for Capital Substitution in the Presence of Risk.Frank Figge - 2005 - Environmental Values 14 (2):185 - 201.
Land Acquisitions in Tanzania: Strong Sustainability, Weak Sustainability and the Importance of Comparative Methods. [REVIEW]Mark Purdon - 2013 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (6):1127-1156.
Environmental Economics, Ecological Economics, and the Concept of Sustainable Development.Giuseppe Munda - 1997 - Environmental Values 6 (2):213 - 233.
'Sustainable Development': Is It a Useful Concept?Wilfred Beckerman - 1994 - Environmental Values 3 (3):191 - 209.
Operationalising Strong Sustainability: Definitions, Methodologies and Outcomes.Begüm Özkaynak, Pat Devine & Dan Rigby - 2004 - Environmental Values 13 (3):279-303.
Does the Sustainability Movement Sustain a Sustainable Design Ethic for Architecture?Tom Spector - 2006 - Environmental Ethics 28 (3):265-283.
Large-Scale Land Acquisition: Evaluating its Environmental Aspects Against the Background of Strong Sustainability. [REVIEW]Lieske Voget-Kleschin - 2013 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (6):1105-1126.
Norton and Passmore on Valuing Nature.Jennifer Welchman - 2007 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 20 (4):353-363.
Risk Management as a Tool for Sustainability.Frank C. Krysiak - 2009 - Journal of Business Ethics 85 (S3):483 - 492.
In Defence of Weak Sustainability: A Response to Beckerman.Salah El Serafy - 1996 - Environmental Values 5 (1):75 - 81.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
On the Concept and Conservation of Critical Natural Capital.C. Tyler DesRoches - 2020 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science (N/A):1-22.
Some Truths Don’T Matter: The Case of Strong Sustainability.C. Tyler DesRoches - 2019 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 22 (2):184-196.
Is There a Relation Between Ecological Practices and Spirituality? The Case of Benedictine Monasteries: Ecological Practices in Benedictine Monasteries.Bernhard Freyer, Valentina Aversano-Dearborn, Georg Winkler, Sina Leipold, Harald Haidl, Karl Werner Brand, Michael Rosenberger & Thomas Wallnig - 2018 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 31 (5):559-582.
The Construction of a Sustainable Development in Times of Climate Change.Eric Brandstedt - 2013 - Dissertation, Lund University
References found in this work
No references found.