【24h】

Why Not NIMBY?

机译:为什么不选择NIMBY?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This paper develops responses to several critics who commented on an earlier paper that we published in this journal (Feldman and Turner 2010). In that paper, we argued that there is nothing necessarily wrong with NIMBY claims or those who make them. The critics raised some important issues, such as whether "NIMBY" is essentially a pejorative term; the possibility that NIMBY claimants are saying something deep about the noncomparability of places; what exactly it means for policy makers to defer to a NIMBY claim; the relationship between NIMBY and environmental justice claims; and whether there is any principled way to distinguish good from bad NIMBY claims. We explore these issues further, and in the course of responding to the critics, we develop some further reasons for skepticism about the prospects for distinguishing good from bad NIMBY claims in a principled way.
机译:本文对一些批评家做出了回应,这些评论家对我们在该杂志上发表的早期论文发表了评论(Feldman and Turner 2010)。在该论文中,我们认为,NIMBY索赔或提出索赔的人不一定没有错。评论家提出了一些重要的问题,例如“ NIMBY”是否本质上是贬义词? NIMBY索赔人可能会对地方的不可比性发表深刻的看法;对于政策制定者而言,服从NIMBY索赔到底意味着什么? NIMBY与环境正义主张之间的关系;以及是否有任何原则上的方法将好与坏NIMBY要求区分开。我们将进一步探讨这些问题,并在回应批评者的过程中,我们提出了一些进一步怀疑的理由,怀疑有原则地将善与恶的主张区别开来的前景。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Ethics, Place and Environment》 |2014年第1期|105-115|共11页
  • 作者

    SIMON FELDMAN; DEREK TURNER;

  • 作者单位

    Department of Philosophy, Connecticut College, New London, CT, USA;

    Department of Philosophy, Connecticut College, New London, CT, USA;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号