Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T23:25:28.843Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Kankakee Wetlands: A Case Study in Ethics and Public Policy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

Sarah E. Roberts
Sarah E. Roberts*
Affiliation:
Purdue University, USA
Get access

Abstract

In 1996, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service made a proposal to restore and preserve 30,000 acres of wetlands in Indiana's Kankakee River basin. Local farmers opposed this, expressing concerns about how a wildlife refuge would affect farming communities along the Kankakee River. Undergirding what seems to be a simple conflict between incompatible environmental and economic interests is a more fundamental conflict between competing ethical frameworks for evaluating public policy. One helpful approach is to examine the normative issues in the Kankakee dispute in terms of the contrast between consequentialist and non-consequentialist ethical frameworks. This article attempts to establish that a failure to recognize alternatives to the consequentialist framework has resulted in a failure of opposing parties to recognize and address each other's ethical concerns. An analysis of the Kankakee wetlands dispute will reveal why it is important for environmentalists to be cognizant of alternatives to consequentialist ethical frameworks.

Type
Articles
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , September 1999 , pp. 191 - 200
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ax, B. (1997). Guest Editorial. The Starke County Leader, July 16.Google Scholar
Ax, B. (1998). Speech at the Kankakee River Watershed Workshop, Hoosier Environmental Council, Hebron, Indiana, February 24.Google Scholar
Clark, F. et al. (1998). “Proposed Grand Kankakee Marsh National Wildlife Refuge: Draft Environmental Assessment.” U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. March.Google Scholar
Epstein, R.A. (1985). Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, R.A. (1994). “n the Optimal Mix of Private and Common Property.” Social Philosophy and Policy 11 (2).Google Scholar
Habermas, J. (1990). “Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action.” In Benhabib, S. and Dallmayr, F. (eds.), The Communicative Ethics Controversy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hospers, J. (1971). “The Right to Property.” Libertarianism. Los Angeles: Nash Publishing.Google Scholar
“House Bill to Slow Grand Kankakee Marsh Project” (1997). The Starke County Leader, July 23.Google Scholar
Mill, J.S. ([1861]1974). Utilitarianism. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, P.B. (1997). “Value Frames and Natural Resource Management.” Presented at the Society for Range Management conference. February 9, Rapid City, South Dakota.Google Scholar
Thompson, P.B., Matthews, R.J., and Van Ravensway, E.O. (1994). Ethics, Public Policy, and Agriculture. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Turner, T (1997). “pposition Rises on Wildlife Refuge.” South Bend Tribune, August 26.Google Scholar
Varner, G. (1994). “Environmental Law and the Eclipse of Land as Private Property.” In Ferre, F. and Hartel, P. (eds.), Ethics and Environmental Policy: Theory Meets Practice. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar