...
首页> 外文期刊>Ecological Economics >Varieties of ecological economics: Do we need a more open and radical version of ecological economics?
【24h】

Varieties of ecological economics: Do we need a more open and radical version of ecological economics?

机译:生态经济学的多样性:我们是否需要更加开放和激进的生态经济学版本?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Should we aim at one single economics paradigm for all purposes or is it wise to accept the existence of more than one theoretical perspective? Is one ecological economics perspective enough or should we encourage competing paradigms as part of a pluralist perspective? Moritz Remig expresses his preference for 'mainstreaming' ecological economics in the January 2015 issue of Ecological Economics suggesting that alternative perspectives and alternative terminologies, such as "sustainability economics", lead to confusion. In this reply I am arguing that there is no value-free or value-neutral ecological economics and that therefore limiting economics or ecological economics to one paradigm is not compatible with democracy. We have to live with some complexity when dealing with sustain-ability issues and should not avoid issues of paradigm, ideology and political-economic system. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
机译:我们应该针对所有目的针对一种单一的经济学范式,还是接受一个以上理论观点的存在是否明智?一个生态经济学观点是否足够,还是我们应该鼓励竞争范式作为多元化观点的一部分?莫里茨·雷米格(Moritz Remig)在2015年1月号的《生态经济学》中表达了他对“主流化”生态经济学的偏爱,这表明诸如“可持续性经济学”之类的其他观点和术语会导致混乱。在此答复中,我认为没有价值无价值或价值中立的生态经济学,因此将经济学或生态经济学限制为一种范式与民主是不相容的。在处理可持续性问题时,我们必须生活在一定的复杂性中,不应回避范式,意识形态和政治经济体制问题。 (C)2015 Elsevier B.V.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号