ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS: FINAL EXAM QUESTIONS

 

Like the midterm, the final exam will include short-answer questions about the material we have read and discussed in this course.  Most of the questions on the exam will be chosen from among those listed below, but I do not promise that the questions will appear exactly as they do below.  I may make slight changes.  This study sheet should give you a very clear idea what to study between now and the exam date. 

 

On the exam itself, you will be given a choice from a set of different questions you might address.  In preparing answers, you should plan that you will be asked to write answers to six questions on the exam itself.  You should plan to answer the question as completely and accurately as you can, given about ten-minute's per question.

 

The exam will include some questions from material covered in the first part of the course.   To study for these questions, you should work with the earlier study sheet distributed before the midterm exam.  Most of the exam, however, will cover material we have discussed since that study sheet was distributed.  This includes material on the syllabus from the assignment on Intergenerational Justice through the last assignments on population and the environment.

 

Wolf: Intergenerational Justice

1) Which are the "obligations of justice?"

2) Compare the libertarian to the Rawlsian account of justice.

3) Compare the total and average utilitarian conceptions of 'sustainability.'

 

Locke: Property Rights

1) According to Locke, what is the process by which we acquire property rights?

2) What are the two "provisos" governing the acquisition of property?

 

Wolf: Property Rights and Intergenerational Justice

1) According to Wolf, how should we understand Locke's "enough and as good" proviso?

2) What are 'usufructuary' rights, and how is the concept of usufruct related to the problem of sustainability?

 

Elliot: Faking Nature

1) Explain Elliot's reasons for regarding 'restored' wilderness as less valuable than undamaged wilderness.

2) Critically evaluate Elliot's view that restored landscapes are analogous to forged works of art. 

3) Is it fair to say that Elliot is against restoration ecology?  Explain why or why not.

 

Light: Faking Nature Revisited

1) What is the "restoration thesis" and what, according to Light, is the problem with Elliot's treatment of this thesis?

2) Light considers Elliot's case where "John and Jill" have been placed into a restored landscape in which original species and systems have been recreated just as they would have been if the area had never been changed.  What, according to Elliot, is wrong with this situation, and why, according to Light, is Elliot's view problematic.

3) Explain the difference between "benevolent restorations" and "malicious restorations," and Light's use of this distinction to evaluate Elliot's view.

4) Explain Light's argument  for the claim that benevolent restorations are not 'fakes, forgeries, or big lies.'

 

Sagoff I: Zuckerman's Dilemma

1) What are the "three kinds of judgments" Sagoff distinguishes in Ch. 1?

2) What does Sagoff mean when he distinguishes different "varieties of goodness," and what is the relevance of this distinction for the economic value of the environment?

3) What does Sagoff mean when he claims that 'aesthetic judgments are essentially disinterested,' and how is this claim relevant if we're considering the value of natural ecosystems?

 

Sagoff II: At the Monument to General Meade

1) Suppose we have a cupcake to divide between two people.  Megan suggests that it should be divided equally, while Zack says he wants the whole thing.  Why is it inappropriate to 'split the difference' between them, giving Zack 3/4 and Megan 1/4? 

2) Explain how the 'cupcake sharing problem' applies in the case of Zach, who would like to preserve the battlefield at Gettysburgh as a site to honor fallen patriots, and Megan who would like to use the same site to build a profitable civil war theme park.

3) Why, according to Sagoff, is it a mistake to regard principled values as mere 'preferences.'

4) Explain Sagoff's reasons for thinking that 'willingness to pay' for preservation is a poor measure of the value of environmental resources.

 

Sagoff III: Should Preferences Count?

1) Sagoff distinguishes among three different conceptions of 'preference.'  Briefly explain these three conceptions and their significance.

2) Sagoff compares economics to phrenology.  What is phrenology, and why does Sagoff think economic theory has fared better?

3) Critically evaluate Sagoff's argument that economics (unlike phrenology) has succeeded only because it is unfalsifiable.

4) Critically explain Sagoff's claim that 'preference satisfaction' is a poor measure of 'welfare.'

 

Sagoff IV: Value in Use or Exchange

1) Explain Sagoff's distinction between value in use and value in exchange, and explain the significance of this distinction.

2) Sagoff claims that 'willingness to pay' doesn't measure the value of anything.  Explain his reasons for this claim.

 

Sagoff V: Common Sense of Pollution

1) Why, according to Sagoff, would it be a mistake to regard pollution on the model of physical assault (as Rothbard and Machan might be thought to recommend).  What is the better alternative Sagoff would recommend?

2) Critically explain Sagoff's "contracting state" solution to the problem of pollution.

 

Sagoff VI: Value of Wild Ecosystems

1) Explain Sagoff's "Catskill Parable" and its significance for 'environmental services' valuation methods.

2) Costanza suggests that we 'set values' on wild ecosystems every day, since these values can be imputed from our choices.  Explain Sagoff's reasons for rejecting this view.

 

Sagoff VII: Carrying Capacity and Ecological Economics

1) Explain Sagoff's critique of the view that humans are 'appropriating about 40% of terrestrial productivity.'

2) Is Sagoff's argument really a critique of 'carrying capacity' as an ideal, or only a critique of certain uses of the idea of 'carrying capacity?'

 

Sagoff VIII: Cows are Better than Condos

1) What does Sagoff mean when he suggests that regulation should involve "knee of the curve" analysis?

2) According to Sagoff, what is the appropriate context and use for economic analysis in resolving environmental disputes?

 

Sagoff IX: The View from Quincy Library

1) Explain the 'moral' Sagoff intends us to draw from the "Quincy Library" case.

 

Schmidtz (Cost Benefit Analysis) OR Hardin (Tragedy of the Commons)

Note: As the syllabus noted, you may read either one of these papers and need not read them both.  I include questions on them both, but on the exam I will make sure that you can address either of them separately).

1) Critically explain Schmidtz's case in favor of CBA.

2) Evaluate Schmidtz's case for CBA in light of Sagoff's critique of CBA.

3) Describe the structure of a 'commons tragedy.'

4) Critically evaluate Hardin's claim that population is a commons tragedy.

 

Wolf: Population and the Environment:

1) Explain the slogan "Development is the best contraceptive" in light of the 'two models of development' discussed in the later part of Wolf's essay.

2) Explain the "Malthusian view" of the population problem, and one major objection to that view.

3) Explain the concept of 'carrying capacity' and its relevance to the problem of human population growth.