Sustainable intensification and ecosystem services: new directions in agricultural governance

Reconciling environmental objectives for land use with the need to produce more food is a prominent concern of scientific and policy discourses on sustainable agriculture. The idea of sustainable intensification has emerged as one prominent framing of this challenge. In this paper we elaborate this idea from an ecosystem services perspective to natural resource management, with particular reference to developments in the UK. The paper considers the general origins and attributes of the perspective and how the challenge of sustainable intensification would be conceptualized and approached through it. While efforts to link analysis of ecosystem services to policy development and delivery in the UK are revealed as consistent with prevailing, and often long standing, approaches to sustainable agriculture, the marketization of environmental assets is highlighted as a distinguishing feature of current policy applications. The character and limitations of this facet of the ecosystem services agenda are discussed. The need to animate ecological issues of sustainable intensification through frames of reference other than those of economic valuation is emphasized.     

Tom Borcherding

Thomas E Borcherding passed away on February 12, 2014, of congestive heart failure. He was 74. He is survived by his wife, Rhoda, and his sons Matthew and Benjamin. He made important, lasting contributions to the discipline of economics, particularly to the fields of public choice and law and economics. While the profession will surely miss his scholarly contributions in the future, we will continue to learn from the insights he has left behind in the academic literature and in our memories. The personal contributions he made to the lives of family members, colleagues, students, and friends will be missed even more acutely. Tom was an important presence in our lives. The absence of his kindness, generosity, keen wit and buoyant personality will be missed by all who knew him.     

Responsibility, Luck, and the 'Equality of What?' Debate

Ronald Dworkin's recently published book, Sovereign Virtue (hereafter SV), appeals to arguments that are popular within, and ideas that are fundamental to, liberal egalitarianism. These arguments and ideas need to be distinguished and unpacked. The purpose of this paper is partly to do this and to cast doubt on the adequacy of various moves made by Dworkin. In addition, and more importantly I argue that the analysis of the 'equality of what?' debate reveals a tension at the heart of contemporary liberal egalitarianism between the Kantian aspiration to eliminate luck and the contemporary aspiration to do political philosophy without metaphysics.     

Current Funding Practices in Academic Science Stifle Creativity

Money is trumping creativity in academic science. This statement was previously given substance in an article I published, along with a companion paper by Mark Roulston in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society ( Carlson, 2006a ; Roulston, 2006 ) and in a subsequent address I gave to the Heads and Chairs meeting in Boulder, Colorado ( Carlson, 2006b ). Here, I expand further on the issues treated in these papers, and make a plea for changing the way funding is administered in academic science. Using examples I show that the present worsening situation places a dead hand on the spirit and creative output of academic scientists, especially junior faculty. I suggest a possible solution, which would enable academic scientists to function in a stable environment, free from spurious financial pressures and dictates from university administration and funding agencies.