Environmental Political Philosophy

Explain shortly what is involved in a problem-solving orientation?
A problem solving orientation focusses on particular real-world issues. It consults all the relevant parties, and does not begin with a rigid commitment to a particular ideology. Rather, it tries to mediate between the interested parties and develop a workable resolution to the problematic tensions. For the sake of efficiency, it considers only those local factors necessary for the resolution of the individual problem.

What characterizes a pragmatist view in environmental philosophy?
A pragmatist view tends to be instrumentalistic, concerned with the resolution of concrete specific problems rather than abstract "big picture" issues. Pragmatists are practically-minded, often empiricists.

What characterizes a pluralist view in environmental philosophy?
A moral pluralism holds that there are many different relatively moral frameworks. It is closely connected with cultural relativism. An environmental pluralism would presumably recognise that there are many different legitimate ways of addressing environmental problems, many different ways of assigning value.

Explain the collective nature of environmental problems?
Environmental problems tend to arise in the commons - a resource which is available for public use. They often arise due to the tragedy of the commons, a logic which has been studied in game theory. The basic problem is that individual rationality conflicts with collective rationality, so that individuals acting in their own interest compromise the group, leading to an overall outcome that is worst for all. The two principle games which represent the collective problems of environmental issues are (1) the prisoner's dilemma and (2) the tragedy of the commons. The first relates to the problem of the free rider, the second to the problem of individuals maximising their interest in finite conditions.

Explain the relation between social justice issues and environmental problems?
Social structures are obviously deeply intertwine with environmental problems. Some social structures encourage the unsustainable exploitation of natural resources, for example. Problems with social justice - such as the greater influence of the wealthy and the powerful - may lead to a counter-productive consolidation of the status quo (which it may be in the interest of the most powerful to maintain). This means that actions necessary to address environmental problems is severely inhibited. [FOR EXAMPLE]

How does Andrew Light (2000) criticize Eric Katz’s view of restoration?
Katz takes a very dim view of environmental restoration, arguing that it is objectionable on numerous counts, not least due to its duplicity, its arrogance, its expression of human domination of nature, its devaluation of originals and its outright impossibility. Light focusses on criticising Katz's domination argument, which, in short, claims that any restoration project is a manipulation of nature to fit human purposes, so a morally objectionable subjugation of nature. His rebuke is simple and cogent, namely that restoration can take the form of a withdrawal of human interest, a 'retreat' which tries to negate or 'un-do' past activity and allow the natural environment to continue in restored form.

Light also notes how Katz's arguments in general depend upon a dubious ontological premise, that of nature-culture dualism. Reject this, and many of his arguments lose their force. Light is keen to sidestep this and other metaphysical debates by adopting a pragmatist view, which evaluates restoration in terms of its practical consequences. He finds that restoration practices in general do help us restore our relationship with nature, cultivate a culture of nature respect, and improve natural conditions in line with their stated intentions. This is true, he notes, whether or not the restored environment has the ontological status of an artifact.

References:
Light, A (2000), 'Ecological Restoration and the Culture of Nature', in Restoring Nature: Perspectives from the Social Sciences and Humanities, (eds.) P. Gobster and B. Hall (Washington: Island Press)