Polling data has indicated that evangelical Christians tend toward skepticism about the existence of anthropogenic climate change. Recogrúzing that evangelical Christians compose a politically influential population, we conducted interviews with pastors and lay members of churches in Dallas, Texas to assess the relationship between their religious beliefs and their view; on climate change. In-depth interviews showed more complex relationships between religious and climate beliefs than has been documented by previous survey-based research. The interviews revealed a set of interrelated religious beliefs, namely in biblical inerrancy, God's sovereignty, human sinfulness, eschatology, and evangelism, frofn which evangelicals draw to describe their perceptions of climate change. Our analysis shows how common belief interpretations contribute to skepticism pi human-induced climate change for many interviewees. We also descmbe how alternative interpretations of these same beliefs promoted environmental concern and even acceptance of anthropogenic climate change among other interviewees. Results suggest the need to account for how faith shapes the complex and nuanced environmental beliefs that evangelicals hold.

Over the past two decades, our knowledge of the ecological impacts of roads has increased rapidly. It is now clear that the environmental effects of transportation infrastructure are inextricable from transportation benefits to economic, social, and cultural values. Despite the necessity of optimizing these multiple values, road planners, scientists, and practitioners have no established methodology or pluralistic approach to address growing ethical complexities. We articulate five ethical issues that could be addressed by developing an ethic of road ecology in order to facilitate the identification, reasoning, and harmonization of ethical dimensions of road planning and development. This inquiry into road ecology can draw lessons from existing applied ethics, such as in ecological restoration and urban planning, to build a narrative that is informed by both science and ethics. We illustrate five ethical issues presented through case studies that elaborate on the motivations, responsibilities, and duties that should be considered in ethically and scientifically complicated road building decisions. To address these issues, we encourage the development of a code of ethics, dedicated intellectual forums, and practical guidance to assist road planners, and more broadly transportation practitioners, to resolve complex ethical quandaries systematically. We hope this perspective encourages conversation for a holistic yet pragmatic approach to this applied ethics problem, while also assisting responsible parties as they navigate difficult moral terrain.

No abstract

Since signing and implementing the North American Free Trade Agreement (FTA) in the early 1990s, the United States has pursued other free trade agreements with nations in Latin Ainerica and Asia. The premise undergirding FTAs is diat trade liberalization within the neo-liberal global economy produces econoinic grovkth and development among all parties, and redtices poverty in poor nations. We examine arguments of proponents of free trade and the neo-liberal economy-particularly those of Martin Wolf, author of Why Globalization Works-to test these claims. We explore alternatives that center on norms of ecological sustainability and social justice, holding these two as inseparable. The central moral question of how to achieve needed socioeconomie development in the Global South in ways that are both ecologically sustainable and socially just frames our analysis. We conclude by proposing five principles for an alternative, more stistainable and equitable economic paradigm.

Every year, the four federal agencies that manage designated wilderness in the United States receive proposals to implement small‐ and large‐scale ecological restorations within the National Wilderness Preservation System. The combination of climate change with other landscape stressors is driving ecological restoration to be one of the single most important, challenging, and potentially litigious wilderness stewardship issues. In addition, different stakeholders may have strongly divergent views about what the right decision should be, and decisions need to go beyond routine technical and scientific analyses to incorporate a broader range of legal and ethical considerations. We present a framework based on a comprehensive, structured set of scientific, legal, and ethical questions to guide the evaluation of proposals for ecological restoration and other types of ecological intervention in wilderness. This framework of questions is a voluntary tool designed to increase communication and transparency among scientists, managers, and interested publics regarding the trade‐offs and uncertainties of ecological restoration, and promote informed public deliberation in managing the public resource of wilderness.