In the US Environmental Protection Agency, the World Wide Fund for Nature and many other environmental organisations, it is standard practice to evaluate particular woods, wetlands and other such places on the basis of the ‘ecosystem services’ they are thought to provide. I argue that this practice cannot account for one important way in which places are of value to human beings. When they play integral roles in our lives, particular places have a kind of value which cannot be adequately (...) conceived in terms of service provision. Since it is in this respect limited, the ecosystem services framework can, I suggest, be criticised on grounds of justice. (shrink)

In Living Well Now and in the Future: Why Sustainability Matters, Randall Curren and Ellen Metzger formulate an ethics of sustainability, conceptually connecting sustainability with ongoing opportunities for people to live well. Part of the sustainability ethics they develop is a principle called the Preservation of Opportunity Principle. My goal in this paper is to analyze the Preservation of Opportunity Principle, and amend the principle in light of certain considerations that are not at the forefront of Curren and Metzger’s project. (...) Specifically, I want to develop the principle in a slightly different way given concerns about the noninstrumental value of nonhuman animals, concerns that are integral to a comprehensive environmental ethical theory. (shrink)