Advertisement

A Reply to My Critics

  • Bryan G. Norton
Article

Abstract

Critics of my book, Sustainability, have raised many objections which are addressed. In general, I emphasize that the book is an integrative work; it must be long and complex beause it attempts a comprehensive treatment of problems of communication, of evaluation, and of management action in environmental discourse. I explain that I depend upon the pragmatists and on work in the pragmatics of language because the current language of environmental policy discourse is inadequate to allow deliberative processes that can reach consensus and cooperative actions. I revise my account of risk analysis somewhat, and defend my broad approach to the concept of sustainability. Finally, I discuss applications of my book to the current situation in environmental policy discourse.

Keywords

sustainability sustainable development environmental pragmatism intergenerational fairness pluralism multiscalar management 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bromley, D. W., Sufficient Reason: Volitional Pragmatism and the Meaning of Economic Institutions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006Google Scholar
  2. Dryzek, J. S. (1997). The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  3. Gunderson L. H., C. S. Holling (eds.) (2002). Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems. Washington, D.C.: Island PressGoogle Scholar
  4. Hajer, M. A. (1995). The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process. Oxford. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  5. Holling C. S., L. H. Gunderson, S. Light (eds.) (1995). Barriers and Bridges to the Renewal of Ecosystems. (New York: Columbia University Press)Google Scholar
  6. Lee, K. (1993). Compass and Gyroscope. Washington, DC: Island PressGoogle Scholar
  7. Norton, B. G. (1986). Conservation and Preservation: A Conceptual Rehabilitation Environmental Ethics 8: 195–220Google Scholar
  8. Norton, B. G. (1987), Why Preserve Natural Variety?, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  9. Norton, B. G. (1984). Environmental Ethics and Weak Anthropocentrism. Environmental Ethics 6: 131–148Google Scholar
  10. Norton, B. G. (1989). Intergenerational Equity and Environmental Policy: A Model Using Rawls’s Veil of Ignorance Ecological Economics 1: 137–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Norton, B. G., Toward Unity Among Environmentalists. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991Google Scholar
  12. NRC (National Research Council) (1983). Risk Assessment in the Federal Government. Washington, DC: National Academy PressGoogle Scholar
  13. NRC (National Research Council) (1996). Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. Washington, DC: National Academy PressGoogle Scholar
  14. Sagoff, M. (2004). Price, Principle, and the Environment. New York, NY Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  15. Solow, R. M. (1993). Sustainability: An Economist’s Perspective. In R. Dorfman, N. Dorfman (eds.), Economics of the Environment. Selected Readings. New York: NortonGoogle Scholar
  16. Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  17. Wondollek, J. M., Yaffee S. I. (2000) Making Collaboration Work: Lessons from Innovation in Natural Resource Management. Washington, DC: Island PressGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Public PolicyGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations