不受市场或网络保障的环境公共产品:对斯克鲁顿和伊安诺内的部分回应

John J. Davenport
{"title":"不受市场或网络保障的环境公共产品:对斯克鲁顿和伊安诺内的部分回应","authors":"John J. Davenport","doi":"10.4018/IJT.2018070103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Roger Scruton and others argue that market-based approaches and voluntary civic organizations can solve many environmental problems. The author argues in response that there are significant limitations to quota systems and similar market fixes, while NGOs and civil society “networks” are not effective in overcoming certain kinds of collective action problems. Even when they work to some extent, network-based solutions such as certification schemes or charity ownership of lands may also cause new problems, such as trends towards excessive concentrations of power, unhealthy dependencies, and lack of choice about which groups act as guardians of our interests.","PeriodicalId":287069,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. Technoethics","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Environmental Public Goods Not Securable by Markets or Networks: A Partial Response to Scruton and Iannone\",\"authors\":\"John J. Davenport\",\"doi\":\"10.4018/IJT.2018070103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Roger Scruton and others argue that market-based approaches and voluntary civic organizations can solve many environmental problems. The author argues in response that there are significant limitations to quota systems and similar market fixes, while NGOs and civil society “networks” are not effective in overcoming certain kinds of collective action problems. Even when they work to some extent, network-based solutions such as certification schemes or charity ownership of lands may also cause new problems, such as trends towards excessive concentrations of power, unhealthy dependencies, and lack of choice about which groups act as guardians of our interests.\",\"PeriodicalId\":287069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Int. J. Technoethics\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Int. J. Technoethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4018/IJT.2018070103\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Int. J. Technoethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4018/IJT.2018070103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

罗杰·斯克鲁顿(Roger Scruton)等人认为,基于市场的方法和自愿的公民组织可以解决许多环境问题。作者在回应中辩称,配额制度和类似的市场修复存在重大限制,而非政府组织和民间社会“网络”在克服某些集体行动问题方面并不有效。即使它们在一定程度上起作用,基于网络的解决方案,如认证计划或土地的慈善所有权,也可能导致新的问题,例如权力过度集中的趋势,不健康的依赖,以及缺乏选择哪些群体作为我们利益的守护者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Environmental Public Goods Not Securable by Markets or Networks: A Partial Response to Scruton and Iannone
Roger Scruton and others argue that market-based approaches and voluntary civic organizations can solve many environmental problems. The author argues in response that there are significant limitations to quota systems and similar market fixes, while NGOs and civil society “networks” are not effective in overcoming certain kinds of collective action problems. Even when they work to some extent, network-based solutions such as certification schemes or charity ownership of lands may also cause new problems, such as trends towards excessive concentrations of power, unhealthy dependencies, and lack of choice about which groups act as guardians of our interests.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The State of Ethical AI in Practice: A Multiple Case Study of Estonian Public Service Organizations The Legitimacy of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Decision Making: Chinese Experience The Fairness Impact Assessment: Conceptualizing Problems of Fairness in Technological Design Operationalizing the Ethics of Connected and Automated Vehicles: An Engineering Perspective Analysis of Production Line Project Based on Value Sensitive Design
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1