Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Contents -- List of Boxes -- Preface -- 1. Introduction: The Idea of Environmental Politics -- The rise of the environment as a political issue -- Political thinking and the environment -- Interests, values and inclusion -- Radical and reformist versions of environmentalism -- 2. The Emergence of the Environment as a Political Issue -- Cultural and structural explanations -- Inglehart and post-materialism -- The new class -- The interdependence of environmental problems -- First-generation environmental issues -- Global atmospheric change -- Conclusion: The truth is stranger than fiction -- 3. The Political Economy of Environmentalism -- Economic growth and the idea of limits -- Limits assessed -- Sustainable development and ecological modernisation -- The degrowth social critique -- Conclusion -- 4. Environmental Ethics -- Preliminaries -- Anthropocentrism and its challengers -- Environmental ethics in practice -- Future generations -- Evaluating ecocentric ethics -- An enlightened anthropocentrism? -- Conclusion -- 5. Animal Ethics -- Why animal ethics? -- The contemporary debate in animal ethics -- Challenges to the moral orthodoxy -- The Singer and Regan challenge to the moral orthodoxy -- Defending the animal welfare ethic -- Animal ethics and wild animals -- Animal and environmental ethics: the differences -- Case for a reconciliation? -- Conclusion -- 6. The State and the Environment -- Greens, decentralisation, and the state -- The state in the international system -- The internationalisation of environmentalism -- The environment and approaches to international relations -- Radical political ecology -- The green state -- Conclusion -- 7. Environmentalism and Democracy -- A contingent relationship? -- Democratic reform -- Deliberative democracy -- Deliberative democracy and the environment -- Ecological democracy.

Examining the debate about animals in the language of justice this book develops both ideal and nonideal theories of justice for animals. It rejects the abolitionist animal rights position in favour of a revised version of animal rights centering on sentience.

Examining the debate about animals in the language of justice this book develops both ideal and nonideal theories of justice for animals. It rejects the abolitionist animal rights position in favour of a revised version of animal rights centering on sentience

In this thorough, yet accessible, book, Robert Garner explores the character of animal protection policy making in Britain and the United States and the opportunities open to animal protection movements. In showing how the political system in both countries has been responsive to the growing demands for reforms in the way animals are treated, he argues that there is a viable reformist strategy for the animal protection movement short of the adoption of animal rights objectives. Much less protection is afforded to animals in the United States, however, largely as a consequence of the particular policy networks within which animal welfare decisions are made

This article is an account of the work of the Boyd Group, an informal grouping of stakeholders on both sides of the debate about animal experimentation formed in Britain in the early 1990s. It is an explorative case study which aims to map the opinion-forming processes of the participants of the Boyd Group, many of whom were interviewed by the author, in light of deliberative theory and with the intention of generating suggestions for improved democratic practices in representative bodies split by seemingly intractable moral differences. Not only is animal experimentation a policy issue involving acute moral conflict, but the Boyd Group is also a body made up of partisans representing organisations on both sides of the debate. Not surprisingly, the transformation of views predicted by some deliberative theorists has not occurred. However, deliberation within the Boyd Group has had the effect of softening some of the views and attitudes of the participants, has facilitated some compromises and provides a useful guide to the methods available to those wishing to manage moral conflict.

Deliberative democracy has been castigated by those who regard it as exclusive and elitist because of its failure to take into account a range of structural inequalities existing within contemporary liberal democracies. As a result, it is suggested, deliberative arenas will merely reproduce these inequalities, advantaging the already powerful extolling mainstream worldviews excluding the interests of the less powerful and those expounding alternative worldviews. Moreover, the tactics employed by those excluded social movements seeking to right an injustice are typically those – involving various forms of protest and direct action – which are incompatible with the key characteristics of deliberatively democracy. This paper seeks to examine the case against deliberative democracy through the prism of animal rights. It will be argued that the critique of deliberative democracy, at least in the case of animal rights, is largely misplaced because it underestimates the rationalistic basis of animal rights philosophy, misunderstands the aspirational character of deliberative theory and mistakenly attributes problems that are not restricted to deliberation but result from interest group politics in general. It is further argued that this debate about the apparent incompatibility between the ideals of deliberative democracy and non-deliberative activism disguises the potential that deliberative democracy has for advocates of animal rights and, by extension, other social movements too.