Abstract

Humans and animals interact frequently, although the degrees of freedom as well as the consequences are distributed rather unevenly in these interactions. The language of game theory allows to study such interactions systematically. However, while game theory has become increasingly influential in moral and political philosophy, it has done so within a purely anthropocentric framework. Either, it focused on interaction between humans alone, or it treated animals as mere instruments to human welfare. This article argues that a physiocentric extension of game theory is both required and possible, considering different concepts of agency. It is shown that a modern utilitarian environmental ethic is not only compatible with the economic methodology of game theory, but that both can also enrich one another.