Restitutive Restoration: New Motivations for Ecological Restoration

Our environmental wrongdoings result in a moral debt that requires restitution. One component of restitution is reparative and another is remediative. The remediative component requires that we remediate our characters in ways that alter or eliminate the character traits that tend to lead, in their expression, to environmental wrongdoing. Restitutive restoration is a way of engaging in ecological restoration that helps to meet the remediative requirement that accompanies environmental wrongdoing. This account of restoration provides a new motivation and justification for engaging in restorative practices in addition to the standard pragmatist justification and motivations

Contracts or scripts? A critical review of the application of institutional theories to the study of environmental change

The impact of new institutionalism on the study of human environment interactions has been meaningful. Institutional perspectives have further shaped and modified the field problems of common pool resources, environmental hazards, and risk and environmental management. Given the relative potential of institutional theories to increase the comprehension of the various dimensions of human-environmental interactions, it has become increasingly important to attempt to consolidate different interpretations of what institutions are, and how they mediate and constrain possibilities for more successful environmental outcomes. This article focuses primarily on contending ontological perspectives on institutions and institutional change. It argues that what should guide the application of institutional theories in practical research regarding environmental change is the ontological dimension, and that the focus of research should be on uncovering the underlying dynamics of institutional change. In doing so, it calls for a methodological pluralism in the investigation of the role institutions play in driving/managing for environmental change

Blame, Communication, and Morally Responsible Agency

Many important theorists – e.g., Gary Watson and Stephen Darwall – characterize blame as a communicative entity and argue that this entails that morally responsible agency requires not just rational but moral competence. In this paper, I defend this argument from communication against three objections found in the literature. The first two reject the argument’s characterization of the reactive attitudes. The third urges that the argument is committed to a false claim

Blame and the Humean Theory of Motivation

A classic, though basically neglected question about motivation arises when we attempt to account for blame’s nature—namely, does the recognition central to blame need help from an independent desire in order to motivate the blame-characteristic dispositions that arise in the blamer? Those who have attended to the question think the answer is yes. Hence, they adopt what I call a Humean Construal of blame on which blame is (a) a judgment that an individual S is blameworthy and (b) an independent desire about S not doing as they did or being as they are. This paper rejects arguments for the Humean Construal, illustrates deep failings of that view, and uses these considerations to support anti-Humean accounts of blame in particular and moral motivation more broadly

Economic Freedom as Political Virtue: An Insight from the Perspective of Value Pluralism

This paper considers the market process as the essence and intrinsic core of liberal democracy. It disentangles market means from welfare ends and recognises the importance, constitutional status and independent stand of the former. Freedom is placed in the same categories as rights. Each constitutional right is protected not because it is efficient, useful or self-executable. On the contrary, rights are protected as a matter of evolutionary choice, as a matter of public principle, as an ethical rather than a practical value.Economic freedom usually leads to success. Its successfulness however sometimes transforms into its biggest enemy. Economic prosperity is a category which can find supporters more rapidly than the notion of economic freedom does. Therefore the latter is often perceived as a means to reach former. The main argument of this paper is that freedom itself loses its internal legitimacy if it is constantly subordinated to the tangible outcomes which it can eventually generate. Freedom can generate welfare, indeed, but welfare maximisation is neither an unconditional nor a quintessential feature of freedom. Freedom must be perceived as a driving force for entrepreneurial discovery, and a prerequisite to democracy, rather than as a mere component of the economic success. Freedom cannot be seen as purely rational, predictable and calculable