It is often assumed that to say that nature should be protected for the sake of human beings just is to say that it should be protected because it is a means to one or more anthropocentric ends. I argue that this assumption is false. In some contexts, claims that a particular natural X should be protected for our sakes mean that X should be protected, not because it is a means to anthropocentric ends, but because it is part of (...) something about human life that is of value: because, that is, its value is anthropocentric and constitutive rather than anthropocentric and instrumental. It follows, I suggest, that one does not need to endorse the non-anthropocentric claim that nature should be protected for its own sake in order to challenge the instrumentalist notion that it should be protected simply because it is a means to anthropocentric ends. To make my case, I consider the UK Government's failed attempt to sell off England's publicly-owned forests. (shrink)

El patrimonio cultural ha adquirido un sentido cada vez más complejo, amplio y dinámico. De una parte, se ha trascendido el antiguo paradigma monumental; de otra, el patrimonio se ha extendido a innumerables ámbitos epistemológicos y prácticos que lo interpretan y aplican según sus intereses.Desde una perspectiva teórica, este trabajo pretende una aproximación conceptual al patrimonio cultural a través de algunas claves que deberían estar presentes en toda reflexión patrimonial. Esta investigación se extenderá también a la noción de Paisaje Urbano (...) Histórico y al ámbito de la arquitectura vernácula a fin de mostrar esa complejidad y su problemática real. (shrink)

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)