DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Ethics and Globalization

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental Ethics and Globalization ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 19, 2020 ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS AND GLOBALIZATION Zarina Abduazimova Amirovna. Department "Ethics and aesthetics.", National University of Uzbekistan Received: 14 March 2020 Revised and Accepted: 8 July 2020 ABSTRACT: The article analyzes the basic values and basic principles of environmental ethics. Special attention is paid to the normative content of the principle of biodiversity, which fixes the value of the diversity of animal and plant species and dictates the need to preserve it. The principle of biodiversity was presented through the prism of the anthropocentric and no-anthropocentric components of environmental ethics. Points of contact between the principle of biodiversity and international regulatory documents regulating environmental activities were identified. The main directions of the influence of globalization on the success of humanity’s attempts to preserve the richness of the wildlife of the planet have been recorded. Among the negative factors created by globalization processes are: 1) unprecedented growth of a globalized economy, increasing society’s pressure on nature and leading to the extinction of species, 2) reduced opportunities for effective environmental regulation at the level of national states due to their dependence on mobile global capital, 3) reduction possibilities of public control over threats to biodiversity due to the decline of the self-organizing public sphere. KEYWORDS: Environmental ethics, biodiversity, position, But anthropocentrism, value, moral responsibility, the principle of equality, the principle of future generations, development, globalization process, ecosystem utilization, economic growth. I. RELEVANCE OF THE TOPIC. The phenomenon of environmental ethics For most of the history of ethics, the focus of its research was on fundamental issues related to determining the normative basis for decisions and actions, establishing fundamental moral principles, identifying the criteria of good and evil, and solving the issue of the meaning of life. Environmental ethics considers a reasonable definition of moral standards, values, principles and rules that people should adhere to, seeking to overestimate them in their relationship with nature. Considering their inner and motivations as compassion, pity, love, emphasizing their manifestation in society. According to A. Sychev, ―environmental ethics opens up new horizons for itself to consider its extensive influence in order to understand the scientific technological environmental challenges. The new concept of a person as a biologically conscious species characterizes the specificity of quality, the manifestation of a person’s attitude to himself and another world around. ―The threat that human relationships to biodiversity consist in social instability and leads to ethics forming the basis and protection of the environment and animal rights, which gives an assessment principles of environmental ethics. Considering the theory of A. Sychev on environmental ethics can be convinced that applied ethics is the main element of the relationship between man and nature. Applied ethics deals with socially significant issues regarding nature and the living world. The value-based normative value of environmental ethics reveals a new approach to moral responsibility, paying attention to the analysis of values and actions. The theory of environmental responsibility specifies the problems of protecting the ecological interaction between man and nature. Ecological ethics grows on the basis of conjugation of ecology (science) and ethics. Environmental science is one of the important resources of environmental ethics. However, it would be wrong to think that all the material of environmental reasoning in philosophy or ethics is delivered by ecology. Philosophy and ethics themselves determine the subject of philosophical-ecological or ethical-ecological research and the problems of its substantiation. This subject is a specific value and normative content, which is comprehended on the basis of experience in overcoming environmental crisis situations. It is in ecological ethics that a new value-based vision of the world is affirmed, in which a person is no longer considered to be a being whose interests should be given priority, to whom it should be treated not only as a means, but also as a goal, as a value in itself. Today, the main basis of environmental ethics is the idea of the unity and harmony of the world, the existence of ecological balance in it and the need for people to enter the conscious guarantor of the preservation of this balance. The unity of the world about the important role of humanity in the modern world and about the responsibility of man for his future is present in various philosophical systems, which is a confirmation of the objectivity of positions. 1500 ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 19, 2020 Ecological ethics studies the relation of man to the environment to the world of nature as its value and partial embodiment. The value-based normative content of environmental ethics is developed on the basis of normative experience, choice activities and overcoming environmental crises. In environmental ethics, some specification of values and norms may occur, but this specification remains at the level of generality sufficient for them to be applicable to all types of relations between man and nature. In this sense, it is necessary to consider the basics of the approach to the problem statement. Environmental ethics has a world outlook where the definition of the scientific and technical researched can be established, but even this will not be enough for the social ethics problem that can be established in politics and the state undertakes certain tasks to understand the responsibilities of people to the environment. Environmental ethics are closely responding to the interdisciplinary orientation of science on their potential and experience in the normatively developed methods of extensive use of the relationship of man to nature. Environmental ethics is actively developing today, many of its questions are overview and are far from conclusive in making certain decisions. A feature of environmental ethics as a socio-philosophical phenomenon is that, as I believe, it goes beyond society, including in its sphere as equal subjects not only people, but also natural objects and phenomena. II. THE METHOD OF STUDYING THE TOPIC. Value-normative foundations of environmental ethics Environmental ethics is based on two groups of values. One group has as its center the demands and needs of a person, or is anthropocentric, the other one expresses the internal significance of nature and its individual manifestations, which is independent of these requests and needs, or no-androcentric. In ethical-ecological discussions, anthropocentrism is often presented in a distorted light. Critics of anthropocentrism see in it the source of a consumer, predatory attitude towards nature. Anthropocentrism is rejected as one of the prerequisites for the onset and deepening of the environmental crisis, as well as one of the factors actively influencing global climate change. Such conclusions are made when presenting a strong version of anthropocentrism as the position according to which man is the center of the Universe and its goal, and as the ―master of nature‖ he opposes all known forms of life. But these conclusions persist even with a ―calm‖ or weak interpretation of anthropocentrism as a position according to which man’s needs and interests are a reference point in relation to nature both in general and in its particular manifestations. They are considered to be dominantly valuable, since man is the only being endowed with reason and morality. Anthropocentrism does not necessarily oppose ecological ethics, ethics of environmental protection, ethics of animal protection, etc. However, concern for the environment and the preservation of wildlife and the protection of animals appear as certain means in relation to a higher goal, which is recognized only man, humanity. We find the classic example in the person of I.Kant, who in his characteristic manner brought anthropocentrism to its logical fullness. Kant resolutely spoke in defense of animals, against causing them unjustified, and even more cruel suffering. He firmly considered the torment of animals immoral, but he did not think so because animals suffer, but because the torment of animals leads to the moral coarsening of man. Anthropocentrism and but anthropocentrism reveal the differences of ecological ethics in understanding the relationship between man and nature. Here the person’s concern for his own interests is established in the conditions of his needs When, but anthropocentrism is an installation of moral and ethical values that expand the horizon of moral responsibility. No anthropocentrism stems from the specifics of anthropocentrism, namely, human needs, which characterizes the values and principles of environmental ethics based on the value of moral responsibility. The lack of anthropocentric value assumptions is well underlined by the current situation with the assessment of biological diversity on the planet. The leading normative criterion in an anthropocentric perspective is the economic method of analyzing benefits and costs. The economic value of nature is determined on the basis of the wide application of various mathematical methods. But at the same time there are problems associated with the valuation of the colossal complexity of nature, its functions, interconnections,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Systematic Review to Update 'Value of a Statistical Life'
    International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health Review Systematic Review to Update ‘Value of a Statistical Life’ Estimates for Australia Jaithri Ananthapavan 1,2,* , Marj Moodie 1,2, Andrew J. Milat 3,4 and Rob Carter 1 1 Deakin Health Economics, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia; [email protected] (M.M.); [email protected] (R.C.) 2 Global Obesity Centre, School of Health and Social Development, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia 3 NSW Ministry of Health, St Leonards, NSW 2065, Australia; [email protected] 4 Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW 2050, Australia * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +61-3-92517181 Abstract: The value of a statistical life (VSL) estimates individuals’ willingness to trade wealth for mortality risk reduction. This economic parameter is often a major component of the quantified benefits estimated in the evaluation of government policies related to health and safety. This study reviewed the literature to update the VSL recommended for Australian policy appraisals. A sys- tematic literature review was conducted to capture Australian primary studies and international review papers reporting VSL estimates published from 2007 to January 2019. International estimates were adjusted for income differences and the median VSL estimate was extracted from each review study. VSL estimates were used to calculate the value of a statistical life year. Of the 18 studies that met the inclusion criteria, two studies were primary Australian studies with a weighted mean VSL of A$7.0 million in 2017 values.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Studies and Utilitarian Ethics
    Environmental Studies and Utilitarian Ethics Brian G. Wolff University of Minnesota Conservation Biology Program,100 Ecology Building 1987 Upper Buford Circle, St. Paul, MN 55108 Email: [email protected] Abstract: Environmental ethicists have focused much attention on the limits of utilitarianism and have generally defined “environmental ethics” in a manner that treats utilitarian environmental ethics as an oxymoron. This is unfortunate because utilitarian ethics can support strong environmental policies, and environmental ethicists have not yet produced a contemporary environmental ethic with such broad appeal. I believe educators should define environmental ethics more broadly and teach utilitarian ethics in a non-pejorative fashion so that graduates of environmental studies and policy programs understand the merits of utilitarian arguments and can comfortably participate in the policymaking arena, where utilitarian ethics continue to play a dominant role. Keywords: Environmental Education, Environmental Studies, Environmental Ethics, Utilitarianism, Utilitarian Ethics Introduction an antipathy for utilitarian ethics. To prepare graduates of environmental science courses for The current generation of college students is participation in the policy process, it is important that expected to witness a dramatic decline in environmental biologists teach the strengths, as well biodiversity, the continued depletion of marine as the weaknesses, of utilitarian ethics in a non- fisheries, water shortages, extensive eutrophication of pejorative fashion, and the limitations, as well as the freshwater and marine ecosystems, a dramatic decline strengths, of competing theories. in tropical forest cover, and significant climatic It must be appreciated that the training given warming (Jenkins 2003, Pauly et al. 2002, Jackson et most biologists seldom includes rigorous courses in al.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Stewardship: Toward an Agapeic Environmental Ethic
    Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Dissertations (1934 -) Projects Beyond Stewardship: Toward an Agapeic Environmental Ethic Christopher J. Vena Marquette University Follow this and additional works at: https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu Part of the Ethics in Religion Commons, Philosophy Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Vena, Christopher J., "Beyond Stewardship: Toward an Agapeic Environmental Ethic" (2009). Dissertations (1934 -). 16. https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/16 BEYOND STEWARDSHIP: TOWARD AN AGAPEIC ENVIRONMENTAL ETHIC by Christopher J. Vena, B.A., M.A. A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin December 2009 ABSTRACT BEYOND STEWARDSHIP: TOWARD AN AGAPEIC ENVIRONMENTAL ETHIC Christopher J. Vena, B.A., M.A. Marquette University, 2009 One of the unfortunate implications of industrialization and the rapid expansion of global commerce is the magnification of the impact that humans have on their environment. Exponential population growth, along with growing technological capabilities, has allowed human societies to alter their terrain in unprecedented and destructive ways. The cumulative effect has been significant to the point that the blame for widespread environmental degradation must be pinned squarely on human shoulders. Because of our dependence on these systems for survival, the threat to the environment is a threat to human life. The root of the ecological crisis is found in human attitudes and behaviors. In the late 1960’s it was suggested that Christianity was a key source of the problem because it promoted the idea of human “dominion” over creation.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Ethics Anthropocentrism
    Environmental Ethics Anthropocentrism Introduction Anthropcentrism is the world view that places human beings as the center of the cosmos Five Interconnected Themes: 1) natural order has a grand hierarchy (a “Great Chain of Being) 2) the ontological divide between human and nonhuman nature 3) nature as a machine 4) only humans beings have intrinsic value/nature has only instrumental value 5) the moral community is limited to human beings Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) The Summa Contra Gentiles develops the ethical implications of the Great Chain of Being humans are closest to the likeness of God rational creatures exercise free will God bestows intrinsic value on rational creatures “Accordingly intellectual creatures are ruled by God, as though He cared for them for their own sake, while other creatures are ruled as being directed to rational creatures” (63) other creatures are slaves to their environment their actions casually determined by the environment thus human beings alone are morally considerable only human beings have freedom “he is free who is cause of himself . intellectual nature alone is free” human beings have the right to subjugate other beings below on the hierarchy “Hereby is refuted the error of those who said it is sinful for man to kill dumb animals: for by divine providence they are intended for man’s use in the natural order” (64) anticipating Kant, the only danger in killing dumb animals is that such behavior might lead to cruelty to human beings Francis Bacon (1561-1626) The Great Instauration focus of knowledge should be practical the improvement of the human condition knowledge is power over nature “the roads to human power and to human knowledge lie close together, and are nearly the same” this view of knowledge as power is stated more clearly in New Organon (1620) Title refers to Aristotle’s logical and methodological works known collectively as the Organon this will be a new organon, thus a new scientific method “Human knowledge and human power meet in one; for where the cause is not known the effect cannot be produced.
    [Show full text]
  • The Value of Human Life
    Richárd Adorján THE VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE Development of an exceptional economic issue in Hungary 2 Department of Public Services Tutor: Dr. Ernő Kemenes Richárd Adorján 3 BUDAPEST UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION PH.D. PROGRAM IN MANAGEMENT THE VALUE OF HUMAN LIFE Development of an exceptional economic issue in Hungary PH.D. DISSERTATION Richárd Adorján Budapest 2004. 4 5 CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 9 I.1. The initial problem........................................................................................ 10 I.2. The structure of the dissertation.................................................................. 14 II. COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS ..................................................................................... 17 II.1. The key points of cost-benefit analysis ...................................................... 18 II.1.1. The most important characteristics of the method.................................. 18 II.1.2. Philosophical issues and other critiques ................................................ 20 II.2. The history of CBA and its use in Hungary .............................................. 22 II.2.1. From the beginning till the Executive Order of President Reagan ........ 22 II.2.2. The role of CBA in Hungary today ......................................................... 22 III. THE HISTORY OF THE ECONOMIC APPROACH TOWARDS VALUING A HUMAN LIFE ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Ethics - Syllabus
    ENVS 345 - Environmental Ethics - Syllabus Environmental Ethics ENVS 345 Fall Term 2015 – University of Oregon Instructor: Nicolae Morar Syllabus 1. Course Description Why should I really care about the environment? What makes environmental issues genuine moral issues? Imagine yourself in the following situation: you are in a room where you can press a button that says “If you press it, the Grand Canyon will be blown away”. What philosophical/ethical reasons would you have to refrain from pressing that button? Are there any such reasons? Is it morally wrong to destroy something we (humans) deem beautiful? Some philosophers believe that there is no moral value without a valuator. So, what if you were the last person on Earth and you would not care about the Grand Canyon, would it still be wrong to press the button? And even if you were not the last person, would it suffice to appeal to the idea that you might deprive future generations from experiencing such ineffable scenery? Imagine the button says, “it you press it, the Grand Canyon will be blown away, but in doing so, you save x human lives.” How many lives would justify blowing away the Grand Canyon? What if those lives are the lives of some people you will never know/meet with? Does it have to be a human life? What about a non-human animal life? What about an ecosystem? This course will attempt to answer some of the questions above and to conceptualize central notions in environmental ethics. We will focus on defining what it means to have moral standing or to be a (moral) person.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Worldviews, Ethics, and Sustainability 25
    Environmental Worldviews, Ethics, and Sustainability 25 Biosphere 2—A Lesson in Humility C O R E C A S E S TUDY In 1991, eight scientists (four men and four women) were sealed sphere’s 25 small animal species went extinct. Before the 2-year inside Biosphere 2, a $200 million glass and steel enclosure period was up, all plant-pollinating insects went extinct, thereby designed to be a self-sustaining life-support system (Figure 25-1) dooming to extinction most of the plant species. that would add to our understanding of Biosphere 1: the earth’s Despite many problems, the facility’s waste and wastewater life-support system. were recycled. With much hard work, the Biospherians were A sealed system of interconnected domes was built in the also able to produce 80% of their food supply, despite rampant desert near Tucson, Arizona (USA). It contained artificial ecosys- weed growths, spurred by higher CO2 levels, that crowded out tems including a tropical rain forest, savanna, and desert, as well food crops. However, they suffered from persistent hunger and as lakes, streams, freshwater and saltwater wetlands, and a mini- weight loss. ocean with a coral reef. In the end, an expenditure of $200 million failed to maintain Biosphere 2 was designed to mimic the earth’s natural chemi- this life-support system for eight people for 2 years. Since 2007, cal recycling systems. Water evaporated from its ocean and other the University of Arizona has been leasing the Biosphere 2 facility aquatic systems and then condensed to provide rainfall over the for biological research and to provide environmental education tropical rain forest.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Ethics
    Environmental ethics 1 .Environmental Ethics Environmental ethics is the discipline in philosophy that studies the moral relationship of human beings to, and also the value and moral status of, the environment and its non-human contents. This entry covers: (1) the challenge of environmental ethics to the anthropocentrism (i.e., human-centeredness) embedded in traditional western ethical thinking; (2) the early development of the discipline in the 1960s and 1970s; (3) the connection of deep ecology, feminist environmental ethics, animism and social ecology to politics; (4) the attempt to apply traditional ethical theories, including consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics, to support contemporary environmental concerns; (5) the preservation of biodiversity as an ethical goal; (6) the broader concerns of some thinkers with wilderness, the built environment and the politics of poverty; (7) the ethics of sustainability and climate change, and (8) some directions for possible future developments of the discipline 2 . Deep Ecology “Deep ecology” was born in Scandinavia, the result of discussions between Naessand his colleagues Sigmund Kvaløy and Nils Faarlund (see Næss 1973 and 1989; also see Witoszek and Brennan (eds.) 1999 for a historical survey and commentary on the development of deep ecology). All three shared a passion for the great mountains. On a visit to the Himalayas, they became impressed with aspects of “Sherpa culture” particularly when they found that their Sherpa guides regarded certain mountains as sacred and accordingly would not venture onto them. Subsequently, Næss formulated a position which extended the reverence the three Norwegians and the Sherpas felt for mountains to other natural things in general.
    [Show full text]
  • The Community Value of a Life
    COMMUNITY VERSUS MARKET VALUES OF LIFE Robert Cooter*and David DePianto** Abstract: Individuals and communities make choices affecting the risk of accidental death. Individuals balance risk and cost in market choices, and communities develop social norms prescribing how much risk people may impose on others (and, in some instances, on themselves). In both cases, the balance between risk and the cost of reducing it implies a value of a statistical life or “VSL.” Applying this novel distinction to the existing VSL literature, we find that community VSLs are significantly smaller in magnitude than market values: whereas market VSLs average roughly $7 million, community VSLs—those based on socially approved behaviors—average roughly $2-3 million. In terms of magnitude, community VSLs therefore fall between the values of life determined though tort litigation (which average under $1 million and vary widely) and those used in the regulatory context (which are derived from market VSLs and commonly range from $5-$7 million). This paper argues that courts and regulators should base the legal value of a life on the community value. Adopting the community value would roughly double current tort awards and halve the cost of death in regulating safety. The legal value of a life should equal the community value for practical and theoretical reasons. The practical reasons include reliability and measurability. The community value is more reliable than unaided intuition of jurors and no harder to measure than the market value. The theoretical reasons are reasonableness and validity. The community value is more reasonable because social norms embody collective judgments over time, which are less susceptible to irrationality and cognitive bias than unaided intuition or market value.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Value a Life
    J Econ Finan (2008) 32:311–323 DOI 10.1007/s12197-008-9030-x How to value a life W. Kip Viscusi Published online: 30 April 2008 # Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2008 Abstract The tradeoff between money and small risks of death is the value of statistical life (VSL), which has become the standard for assessing the benefits of risk and environmental regulations. Labor market estimates of the VSL average about $7 million. This valuation amount rises with age and then declines, closely tracking the pattern of consumption over the life cycle. The VSL for those at age 60 is higher than for people in their 20s. Application of this methodology to assess the mortality costs to smokers indicates a personal mortality cost on the order of $200 per pack for men and $100 for women using a 3% discount rate, but based on smokers’ rates of time preference the costs are reduced by about an order of magnitude. Keywords Value of Statistical Life . Risk Regulation . Cigarettes . Mortality Cost JEL codes J17 . I12 . I18 1 Framing our thinking about the value of life When non-economists hear that economists are placing a value on risks to human life, they typically assume that such economic measures involve some sort of morally offensive accounting exercise, such as equating the value of an individual life with the present value of his or her future earnings. Such measures do, of course, have prominence in personal injury litigation, as they serve as a principal reference point for the financial loss that a family has incurred after a wrongful death to a family member.
    [Show full text]
  • The Value of Life
    Cleveland State Law Review Volume 38 Issue 1 Issues 1 and 2: Symposium: Natural Article 14 Law and Legal Reasoning 1990 The Value of Life Lewis A. Kornhauser New York University Follow this and additional works at: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev Part of the Legal History Commons How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! Recommended Citation Lewis A. Kornhauser, The Value of Life, 38 Clev. St. L. Rev. 209 (1990) available at https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev/vol38/iss1/14 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at EngagedScholarship@CSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cleveland State Law Review by an authorized editor of EngagedScholarship@CSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE VALUE OF LIFE1 LEwIS A. KORNHAUSER 2 In "Natural Law and Legal Reasoning," John Finnis contends, first, that rationality does not dictate a unique resolution of a conflict among incommensurable values though it may distinguish acceptable from un- acceptable outcomes; second, that, in cases of first impression, the law may resolve these conflicts as it pleases; but third, that, once a legal decision has been rendered, consistency, or, to use Dworkin's term, in- tegrity, requires that society adhere to its prior resolution of this conflict between competing values.3 This comment elaborates some of the con- straints that this third requirement of consistency imposes on federal health and safety regulation. Many, if not most, regulations promulgated by federal agencies affect the survival chances of many individuals. For many of these regulations, Executive Order 12291 requires that the agency adopt the regulation dictated by a cost-benefit analysis.4 Thus, the grounds of choice apparently require the agency to "value" life and then to weigh lives saved against the monetary costs.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Health Economics the Value of a Statistical Life: a Meta
    Journal of Health Economics 28 (2009) 444–464 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Health Economics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/econbase The value of a statistical life: A meta-analysis with a mixed effects regression model Franc¸ ois Bellavance a, Georges Dionne b,c,∗, Martin Lebeau c a Department of Management Sciences, HEC Montréal, Canada b Canada Research Chair in Risk Management, HEC Montréal, 3000 Chemin de la Cote-Ste-Catherine, Montreal, QC, Canada H3T 2A7 c Department of Finance, HEC Montréal, Canada article info abstract Article history: The value of a statistical life (VSL) is a very controversial topic, but one which is essential to Received 21 December 2006 the optimization of governmental decisions. We see a great variability in the values obtained Received in revised form 25 August 2008 from different studies. The source of this variability needs to be understood, in order to offer Accepted 20 October 2008 public decision-makers better guidance in choosing a value and to set clearer guidelines for Available online 8 November 2008 future research on the topic. This article presents a meta-analysis based on 39 observations obtained from 37 studies (from nine different countries) which all use a hedonic wage JEL classification: D80 method to calculate the VSL. Our meta-analysis is innovative in that it is the first to use D13 the mixed effects regression model [Raudenbush, S.W., 1994. Random effects models. In: D61 Cooper, H., Hedges, L.V. (Eds.), The Handbook of Research Synthesis. Russel Sage Foundation, H43 New York] to analyze studies on the value of a statistical life.
    [Show full text]