On the application of rights-based moral theories to siting controversies

Martin Peterson and Sven Ove Hansson

Journal of Risk Research, 2004, vol. 7, issue 2, 269-275

Abstract: In this paper we discuss how rights-based moral theories can increase our understanding of siting controversies. It is argued that the notion of residual obligations can be used to overcome, at least in part, the conflict between the individual right not to be exposed to involuntary risks arising from e.g. the establishment of a new industry, and the rights of industries and other large organizations to build plants that are associated with risks for people living nearby. Use is made of a typology of residual obligations according to which the types are obligations to compensate, to communicate, to improve, to search for knowledge, and to have an appropriate attitude. Each of these types of residual obligations can be shown to be relevant in siting controversies.

Date: 2004
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/1366987042000171933 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:7:y:2004:i:2:p:269-275

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RJRR20

DOI: 10.1080/1366987042000171933

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Risk Research is currently edited by Bryan MacGregor

More articles in Journal of Risk Research from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().