A theory of Earth jurisprudence

Burdon, Peter D.

doi:10.4324/9780203797013-4

Cited by 12 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It takes the wellbeing or common good of this comprehensive whole as the starting point for human ethics." (Burdon 2012) 4. What are Rights of Nature / environmental personhood?…”

Section: What Is Earth Jurisprudence?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Media, Arts and Humanities sustainability educator toolkit

Walton,

Oji,

Eldridge

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It takes the wellbeing or common good of this comprehensive whole as the starting point for human ethics." (Burdon 2012) 4. What are Rights of Nature / environmental personhood?…”

Section: What Is Earth Jurisprudence?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Media, Arts and Humanities sustainability educator toolkit

Walton,

Oji,

Eldridge

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…314 Considering laws as being derived from the universe means they are found and interpreted by humans, as opposed to being made. 315 This may be seen as reminiscent of natural law, 316 in which a universal higher law "is discoverable by humans through a process of reason." 317 While natural law is, in general, inherently anthropocentric given its primary concern with humans, 318 Burdon claims that "Earth Jurisprudence can correctly be described as a theory of natural law."…”

Section: B Wild Lawmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preventing Another Pandemic: How Changing the Legal Paradigm Governing Intensive Animal Agriculture Will Reduce the Risk of Future Zoonoses

Kotzmann¹,

Stonebridge²

2022

cjel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The public health consequences tied to our relationships with animals are significant. The COVID-19 pandemic and previous instances of zo- onotic disease emergence and re-emergence have demonstrated that human relationships with animals can have a profound impact on our health. In the US, the most prevalent human-animal relationship is the one we have with the animals that we eat. This relationship is defined and facilitated by intensive animal agriculture, a practice at high risk of causing zoonotic disease emergence. This Article explores the current regulatory regime governing intensive animal agriculture and argues that it is deficient in the context of zoonotic disease. It argues that this deficiency is a result of the legal anthropocentrism that manifests in practices inherent to intensive animal agriculture and demonstrates that such an approach is unable to adequately manage the risk of future zoonoses. This Article argues for a regulatory approach that acknowl- edges the interdependence of humans, animals, and the environment. It proposes Wild Law as the most appropriate framework to address the risk of zoonotic disease and concludes that intensive animal agriculture would not be permitted under a Wild Law approach due to its inherent inability to operate within the context of an interdependent human-an- imal-environment relationship.

show abstract

“…Critical counter practice draws from the post-traditions, in particular post-colonialism which is concerned with the epistemic violence of colonialism, uses poststructuralist ‘deconstruction’ to destabilise Western/European/White cultural supremacy and focuses on protecting and reviving ‘voices that have historically been subjugated by colonial violence’ (Andreotti, 2010: 238). In critical counter practice, GCE is associated with critical global citizenship (Oxley and Morris, 2013) and an eco-centric version of environmental global citizenship (Burdon, 2012; Mylius, 2013). Similarly to Social-justice activism, it has a subjectification function but a stronger focus on pluralising epistemologies and exposing students to non-dominant knowledges and values (Sant et al, 2018).…”

Section: Gce Ideal Typesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global citizenship education: A new ‘moral pedagogy’ for the 21st century?

Franch

2020

European Educational Research Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past two decades global citizenship education (GCE) has become established in national and international education policy. This article focuses on the emergence of GCE in the educational discourse of the Province of Trento in northern Italy and outlines how policymakers and teachers construct GCE as a pedagogical framework for schooling in the 21st century. Combining the perspectives that emerge from the scholarly literature with the findings of a qualitative study based on Constructivist and Informed Grounded Theory, the article proposes a typology of GCE ideal-types. The typology illustrates two ‘mainstream ideal-types’ of GCE (neo-liberal human capitalism and cosmopolitan humanism) and two ‘critical ideal-types’ (social-justice activism and critical counter practice). In the province studied, the dominant perspective is cosmopolitan humanism. GCE is essentially conceptualised as a ‘new moral pedagogy’ that reflects adherence and commitment to a universal moral structure based on humanistic cosmopolitan values. The author believes that critical GCE perspectives in line with social-justice activism and critical counter practice should find expression in both policies, curricula and practices. However, this is recognised as a challenge which could be partially addressed through teacher education and an alliance between academia and practice.

show abstract

A theory of Earth jurisprudence

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

Media, Arts and Humanities sustainability educator toolkit

Media, Arts and Humanities sustainability educator toolkit

Preventing Another Pandemic: How Changing the Legal Paradigm Governing Intensive Animal Agriculture Will Reduce the Risk of Future Zoonoses

Global citizenship education: A new ‘moral pedagogy’ for the 21st century?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About