Citation:Mintz-Woo, K. (2018) 'Security and Distribution, or Should You Care about Merely Possible Losses?' Ethics, Policy & Environment, 21 (3), pp. 382-386. doi: 10.1080/21550085.2018.1562532
Jonathan Herington argues that harms can occur whether or not there is actually a loss. He claims that subjectively or objectively merely being at risk of losing access to basic goods is sufficient for lowering that individual's well-being for the value of 'security'. I challenge whether losing access to basic goods is sufficient to justify the introduction of this value. I also point to some issues in his interpretation of IPCC risk categories and the social science research he relies on.
This website uses cookies. By using this website, you consent to the use of cookies in accordance with the UCC Privacy and Cookies Statement. For more information about cookies and how you can disable them, visit our Privacy and Cookies statement