Aggregation and deliberation in valuing environmental public goods: A look beyond contingent pricing

被引:212
作者
Sagoff, M [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Maryland, Inst Philosophy & Publ Policy, College Pk, MD 20742 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
environmental goods; environmental services; contingent pricing; aggregation; deliberation;
D O I
10.1016/S0921-8009(97)00144-4
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Starting from a distinction between Kantian (principle-based) and utilitarian (preference-based) approaches in political theory, this essay argues that we may understand normative judgments individuals make about policy to express principled views of the public interest or purpose not private preferences about their own consumption opportunities. These judgments, in other words, state opinions about what we ought to do as a society rather than into account these kinds of judgments-which dominate public discourse about the environment-only if it moves toward a deliberative, discursive, jury-like research method emphasizing informed discussion leading toward a consensus based on an argument about the public interest. (C) 1998 Elsevier Science B.V.
引用
收藏
页码:213 / 230
页数:18
相关论文
共 119 条
[1]  
Abramson J., 1994, We, the Jury: The Jury System and the Ideal of Democracy
[2]  
ANNIS S, 1988, DIRECT POOR GRASSROO
[3]  
[Anonymous], EXIT VOICE LOYALTY R
[4]  
[Anonymous], [No title captured]
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1995, ETHICS ARK ZOOS ANIM
[6]  
[Anonymous], 1996, Understanding risk: Informing decisions in a democratic society
[7]  
[Anonymous], 1956, EC THEORY DEMOCRACY
[8]  
Apel Karl-Otto., 1980, TRANSFORMATION PHILO
[9]  
Argyle M., 1987, PSYCHOL HAPPINESS
[10]  
Arrow K. J., 1951, Social Choice and Individual Values