Suchergebnisse

Civil Disobedience and the Politics of Identity is an attempt to provide criteria for when it is both morally necessary and politically expedient to break with civic harmony social cohesion in the name of a higher social justice, In Civil Disobedience and the Politics of Identity, Jason Hill attempts to apply general cosmopolitan humanist moral intuitions and democratic political beliefs to certain clearly perceived wrongs that have otherwise been ignored, by providing criteria for when it is necessary to break the peace and become a moral insurrectionist. Hill identifies precisely what we should not get along with: the Islamic burka, the anti-gay marriage movement, anti-assimilationism and xenophobia, and multiculturalism and the politics of identity for the collusion with cultural, racial, and ethnic apartheid. At the end of each chapter Hill provides a comprehensive and sweeping antidote to each of the political and moral maladies he identifies as contentious norms, mores, and institutional phenomena no civilized society should get along with. Provocative and accessible, Civil Disobedience and the Politics of Identity is critical reading for scholars of political theory, social philosophy, and ethics

Abstract
Highly productive agriculture is essential to feed humanity, but agricultural practices often harm human health and the environment. Using a nitrogen (N) mass-balance model to account for N inputs and losses to the environment, along with empirical based models of yield response, we estimate the potential gains to society from improvements in nitrogen management that could reduce health and environmental costs from maize grown in the US Midwest. We find that the monetized health and environmental costs to society of current maize nitrogen management practices are six times larger than the profits earned by farmers. Air emissions of ammonia from application of synthetic fertilizer and manure are the largest source of pollution costs. We show that it is possible to reduce these costs by 85% ($21.6 billion per year, 2020$) while simultaneously increasing farmer profits. These gains come from (i) managing fertilizer ammonia emissions by changing the mix of fertilizer and manure applied, (ii) improving production efficiency by reducing fertilization rates, and (iii) halting maize production on land where health and environmental costs exceed farmer profits, namely on low-productivity land and locations in which emissions are especially harmful. Reducing ammonia emissions from changing fertilizer types—in (i)—reduces health and environmental costs by 46% ($11.7 billion). Reducing fertilization rates—in (ii)—limits nitrous oxide emissions, further reducing health and environmental costs by $9.5 billion, and halting production on 16% of maize-growing land in the Midwest—in (iii)—reduces costs by an additional $0.4 billion.