‘Relational Values’ is Neither a Necessary nor Justified Ethical Concept

References

• Baard, P. (2019). The goodness of means: Instrumental and relational values, causation, and environmental policies. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 32(1), 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-019-09762-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baard, P. (2022). Ethics in biodiversity conservation. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Batavia, C., & Nelson, M. P. (2017). For goodness’ sake! What is intrinsic value and why should we care? Biological Conservation, 209, 366–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.03.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan, K. M. A., Balvanera, P., Benessaiah, K., Chapman, M., Díaz, S., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Gould, R., Hannahs, N., Jax, K., Klain, S., Luck, G. W., Martín-López, B., Muraca, B., Norton, B., Ott, K., Pascual, U., Satterfield, T., Tadaki, M., Taggart, J., & Turner, N. (2016). Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(6), 1462–1465. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1525002113
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coeckelbergh, M. (2012). Growing moral relations: Critique of moral status ascription. Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Crisp, R. (1998). Animal liberation is not an environmental ethics: A response to Dale Jamieson. Environmental Values, 7(4), 476–478. https://doi.org/10.3197/096327198129341681
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darwall, S. L. (2002). Welfare and rational care. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Darwall, S. L. (2006). The second-person standpoint: Morality, respect, and accountability. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deplazes-Zemp, A. (2023). Beyond intrinsic and instrumental: Third-category value in environmental ethics and environmental policy. Ethics, Policy & Environment, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/2155085.2023.2155341
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deplazes-Zemp, A., & Chapman, M. (2021). The ABCs of relational values: Environmental values that include aspects of both intrinsic and instrumental valuing. Environmental Values, 30(6), 669–693. https://doi.org/10.3197/096327120X15973379803726
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansson, S. O. (2006). How to define: A tutorial. Princípos, Natal, 13, 5–30.
   Google Scholar
• Himes, A., & Muraca, B. (2018). RV: The key to pluralistic valuation of ecosystem services. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 35, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2018.09.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, S. P. (2020). Legal rights and nature’s contributions to people: Is there a connection? Biological Conservation, 241, 108325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, S. P. (2022a). Against relational values. The Harvard Review of Philosophy, 29, 45–54. https://doi.org/10.5840/harvardreview20228645
   Google Scholar
• James, S. P. (2022b). How nature matters: culture, identity, & environmental value. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Knippenberg, L., de Groot, W. T., van den Born, R. J., Knights, P., & Muraca, B. (2018). Relational value, partnership, eudaimonia: A review. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 35, 39–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2018.10.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korsgaard, C. (1983). Two distinctions in goodness. The Philosophical Review, 92(2), 169–195. https://doi.org/10.2307/2184924
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luque-Lora, R. (2023). The trouble with relational values. Environmental Values, 32(4), 411–431. https://doi.org/10.3197/096327122X16611552268681
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muraca, B. (2011). The map of moral significance: A new axiological matric for environmental ethics. Environmental Values, 20(3), 375–396. https://doi.org/10.3197/096327111X13077055166063
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norton, B., & Sanbeg, D. (2021). RV: A unifying idea in environmental ethics and evaluation. Environmental Values, 30(6), 695–714. https://doi.org/10.3197/096327120X16033868459458
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Neill, J., & Sugden, S. J. B. (1992). Varieties of intrinsic value. The Monist, 72(2), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.5840/monist19927527
   Google Scholar
• Parfit, D. (2011). On what matters. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pascual, U., Balvanera, P., Díaz, S., Pataki, G., Roth, E., Stenseke, M., Watson, R. T., Başak Dessane, E., Islar, M., Kelemen, E., Maris, V., Quaas, M., Subramanian, S. M., Wittmer, H., Adlan, A., Ahn, S., Al-Hafedh, Y. S., Amankwah, E. … Wickson, F. (2017). Valuing nature’s contributions to people: The IPBES approach. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 26–27, 7–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2016.12.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, M., & Sandin, P. (2013). The last man argument revisited. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 47(1–2), 121–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10790-013-9369-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabinowicz, W., & Rønnow-Rasmussen, T. (2000). A distinction in value: Intrinsic and for its own sake. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 100( Part 1), 33–51.
   Google Scholar
• Ridge, M., (2023). Reasons for action: Agent-neutral vs. agent-relative, In Zalta, E. N., and U. Nodelman (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2023 Edition). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2023/entries/reasons-agent/
   Google Scholar
• Rønnow-Rasmussen, T. (2011). Personal value. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rønnow-Rasmussen, T. (2022). Instrumental values – Strong and weak. Ethical Theory & Moral Practice, 5(1), 23–43. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014422001048
   Google Scholar
• Rønnow-Rasmussen, T. (2022). The value gap. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rosati, C. S. (2009). Relational good and the multiplicity problem. Philosophical Issues, 19(1), 205–234. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-6077.2009.00167.x
   Google Scholar
• Samuelsson, L. (2010). Reasons and values in environmental ethics. Environmental Values, 19(4), 517–535. https://doi.org/10.3197/096327110X531589
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandler, R. L. (2012). The ethics of species. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stålhammar, S., & Thorén, H. (2019). Three perspectives on RV of nature. Sustainability Science, 14(5), 1201–1212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00718-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallace, J. (2019). The moral nexus. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar