The adoption of the Kyoto Protocol was a major breakthrough in committing industrialized countries to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases, even if the effect is disputed. The protocol works through mechanisms that ascribe value to the environment in terms of those emissions—a numerical value based on carbon, which is then translated into a monetary value. This article reviews the different understandings of value implicated in debates about the environment seen through carbon. It does this by contrasting the values embedded in some of the various initiatives that have resulted from the Kyoto Protocol, and how they relate to the market, government control, and individual consumer morality, among other things. Controversy over carbon trading is entangled in the capacity of carbon to commensurate a wide range of human and non-human actions via their cost in emissions, which nevertheless is countered by moral differentiation.
Grégory Dallemagne, Víctor del Arco, Ainhoa Montoya and Marta Pérez
This commentary seeks to engage the issue of 'impact' in social anthropology by scrutinising the topic of open access. Drawing on the discussions that took place at the international conference 'FAQs about Open Access: The Political Economy of Knowledge in Anthropology and Beyond', held in October 2014 in Madrid, we suggest that addressing the topic of open access allows a two-fold goal. On one hand, it elucidates that public debates about open access rely on a rather minimalist notion of openness that does not yield an adequate understanding of what is at stake in those debates. On the other, we argue that expanding the notion of openness does not only allow us to revisit the debate concerning what we do as academics, how we do it and what its value is, but also to do so going beyond current notions of 'impact' and 'public value' underpinned by the principle of economic efficiency in a context of increasingly reduced research funds.
Peter Jones, Michael Butler, Taylor Smith, Matthew C. Eshleman and David Detmer
Three articles analyze David Detmer’s first book on Sartre, Freedom as a Value. Peter Jones argues that Sartre uses freedom in only one sense, as freedom to choose, whereas Detmer argues that Sartre distinguishes between freedom of choice (“ontological freedom”) and freedom of obtaining (“practical freedom”). Michael Butler’s paper contends that under a Sartrean framework, any moral judgment we make regarding our own action is never final; the meaning and moral value of our past actions always remains reinterpretable in light of what unfolds in the future. Our interactions with other people reveal that we are responsible for far more than we had initially supposed ourselves to be choosing when we began our project, such that it is in fact impossible to ever finish taking responsibility completely. Taylor Smith and Matthew Eshleman tackle Sartre’s supposed “subjectivism” from the opposite angle. They agree with Detmer that Sartre’s belief that values are mind-dependent does not necessarily entail ethical subjectivism, but argue that even the early Sartre was more fully committed to a cognitivist view of normative justification than Detmer allows. Detmer’s replies to all three essays round out this section and this issue.
Rank Infraction among the Ngadha in Flores, Indonesia
Olaf H. Smedal
Taking up the issue of whether the study of values is best served by monist or pluralist accounts, Joel Robbins (2013: 102) notes that debates over these issues center on the nature of the relations between values. Inspired by Louis Dumont
Value-Maximizing Interpretations of Withnail and I
goal here is to argue that value-maximizing interpretive projects have a point as well. Two Interpretive Projects As mentioned earlier, an interpretive project is a procedure for generating interpretations of works of narrative fiction. It consists of a
Hierarchy, Value, and the Value of Hierarchy
Naomi Haynes and Jason Hickel
the way for us to speak not only of hierarchical social organization but also of values. This connection is most immediately evident in the fact that when people speak positively of hierarchy, they are speaking about what they value. Even more
Narratives of Meaning, Use and Development
value and significance, which focus on original built form ( Jones 2017 ). Jones (2017) suggests that the incorporation of ethnographic methodologies such as oral history testimony is a useful way of ensuring a range of values are recognised in the
(De)materializing Kinship—Holding Together Mutuality and Difference
Kathryn E. Goldfarb and Caroline E. Schuster
kinship in order to explore two interrelated concepts that are of vital importance to understanding the wider stakes of relatedness today: the politics of value and semiotics. Put another way, we put forward a perspective on materiality rooted in
A History of the Concept of Separation of Church and State in the Netherlands
explicitly framed as a core value of Dutch culture and politics and a norm for others. Separation of Church and State as a Fundamental Value of Dutch Society In 1982, the young sociologist Paul Schnabel noted, in his dissertation on the growing influence of
Knowledge, especially school knowledge, is never value free. The production of school knowledge involves a selection process that underpins cultural reproduction among social groups. However, not all members of society can make their knowledge