A novel framework to operationalise value-pluralism in environmental valuation: Environmental value functions

2022 ◽  
Vol 193 ◽  
pp. 107327
Author(s):  
Pirta Palola ◽  
Richard Bailey ◽  
Lisa Wedding
Author(s):  
Gregory Cooper

The relationship between environmental ethics and the application of economic values to the environment has followed two main paths: (1) blocking attempts to value the environment economically by extending the concept of moral standing to elements of the natural world, and (2) attempting a pragmatic reconciliation that harnesses the efficacy of economic motivation while avoiding the excesses of an exclusively economic perspective. The pragmatic reconciliation must still come to grips with several ethical issues that confront environmental valuation. The fact that economics is grounded in a utilitarian consequentialism renders it susceptible to some long-standing deontological challenges having to do with rights and justice. Other challenges include a reluctance to embrace value pluralism, overly ambitious attempts at pricing, failure to incorporate deeper value commitments that do not take the form of preferences, and the inadequacies of a preference-satisfaction account of well-being.


Author(s):  
A. K. Enamul Haque ◽  
M. N. Murty ◽  
Priya Shyamsundar

1996 ◽  
pp. 16-26
Author(s):  
Dionisiy Lyahovych

Ecological ethical duty is a kind of philosophical and theological reflection on environmental issues, and at the same time finding the appropriate foundation for environmental ethics. By the term "ethical duty" we mean the search for environmental value, the nature of which would have the effect of inducing the appropriate personal and social behavior and thus influenced the customs and culture of the people.


Author(s):  
Meghan Sullivan

This chapter introduces the reader to future discounting and some received wisdom. The received wisdom about rational planning tends to assume that it is irrational to have near‐biased preferences (i.e., preferences for lesser goods now compared to greater goods further in the future).Thechapter describes these preferences by introducing the reader to value functions. Value functions are then used to model different kinds of distant future temporal discounting (e.g., hyperbolic, exponential, absolute). Finally, the chapter makes a distinction between temporal discounting and risk discounting. It offers a reverse lottery test to tease apart these two kinds of discounting.


2021 ◽  
Vol 344 (3) ◽  
pp. 112261
Author(s):  
Zihui Liu
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Bekir Afsar ◽  
Kaisa Miettinen ◽  
Francisco Ruiz

Interactive methods are useful decision-making tools for multiobjective optimization problems, because they allow a decision-maker to provide her/his preference information iteratively in a comfortable way at the same time as (s)he learns about all different aspects of the problem. A wide variety of interactive methods is nowadays available, and they differ from each other in both technical aspects and type of preference information employed. Therefore, assessing the performance of interactive methods can help users to choose the most appropriate one for a given problem. This is a challenging task, which has been tackled from different perspectives in the published literature. We present a bibliographic survey of papers where interactive multiobjective optimization methods have been assessed (either individually or compared to other methods). Besides other features, we collect information about the type of decision-maker involved (utility or value functions, artificial or human decision-maker), the type of preference information provided, and aspects of interactive methods that were somehow measured. Based on the survey and on our own experiences, we identify a series of desirable properties of interactive methods that we believe should be assessed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document