title: Right action and the non-virtuous agent

authors: van Zyl, Liezl

subjects: philosophy

abstract: According to qualified-agent virtue ethics, an action is right if and only if it is what a virtuous agent would characteristically do in the circumstances. I discuss two closely related objections to this view, both of which concern the actions of the non-virtuous. The first is that this criterion sometimes gives the wrong result, for in some cases a non-virtuous agent should not do what a virtuous person would characteristically do. A second objection is it altogether fails to apply whenever the agent, through previous wrongdoing, finds herself in circumstances that a virtuous person cannot be in. I focus on Rosalind Hursthouse's account of right action, and argue that it can provide a satisfactory response to both these objections. I do so by drawing attention to the distinction between action guidance and action assessment, and arguing that while the above criterion is adequate as a means of action assessment, we should turn to the virtue- and vice-rules (v-rules) for action guidance.

text: Right action and the non-virtuous agent According to qualified-agent virtue ethics, an action is right if and only if it is what a virtuous agent would characteristically do in the circumstances. I discuss two closely related objections to this view, both of which concern the actions of the non-virtuous. The first is that this criterion sometimes gives the wrong result, for in some cases a non-virtuous agent should not do what a virtuous person would characteristically do. A second objection is it altogether fails to apply whenever the agent, through previous wrongdoing, finds herself in circumstances that a virtuous person cannot be in. I focus on Rosalind Hursthouse's account of right action, and argue that it can provide a satisfactory response to both these objections. I do so by drawing attention to the distinction between action guidance and action assessment, and arguing that while the above criterion is adequate as a means of action assessment, we should turn to the virtue- and vice-rules (v-rules) for action guidance.

year: 2010

title: Fly-tipping: Drivers, deterrents and impacts

authors: Purdy, Ray

abstract: Fly-tipping is a significant problem in England. For the 2020/21 year, Local Authorities (LAs) in England dealt with 1.13 million fly-tipping incidents, an increase of 16% from the 980,000 reported in 2019/20. The cost of clearance for larger incidents also increased in the last year (a 6% increase from 2019/20). Additionally, these operational metrics do not capture the full picture as they only include public land. It is important for Government to better understand the main causes and consequences of fly-tipping because it has significant financial, social and environmental impacts which affect communities across the length and breadth of the country. It is at best unsightly, can impact public amenities, and negatively affect people’s perception of where they live and their quality of life. It can also pose risks to the environment and human/animal health. For example, there have been cases where dangerous waste has been deposited near water reservoirs in recent years. Those who fly-tip can also avoid paying disposal costs, impose clean-up costs on taxpayers and private landowners (who can also be responsible in many cases for the costs of clear up), as well as undercutting legitimate waste businesses. Additionally fly-tipping can also undermine achieving a circular economy. If Government can’t deal effectively with it then it becomes harder to achieve recycling and other targets. Despite the continuous efforts of the Government, LAs, National Fly-Tipping Prevention Group, Environment Agency, and charities in tackling fly-tipping, the situation isn’t improving and the problem appears more entrenched than ever. The 2006 Jill Dando Institute project commissioned by Government to look at fly-tipping identified that enforcement had dominated the thinking behind tackling fly-tipping at the expense of a strategic approach. Fifteen years later the focus is still on stronger regulation, with a large reliance on tip-offs, or clues in the waste identifying the perpetrator. This approach has not been as effective as hoped because of the resourcing implications of regulation and enforcement, and more generally hasn’t satisfactorily addressed the drivers behind fly-tipping. This research was commissioned by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in 2021 because it has become increasingly obvious to Government that a more detailed and systematic examination of the factors influencing fly-tipping was necessary, and the expectation is that such a review might help provide better evidence based policy making and influence future strategies and interventions.

text: Fly-tipping: Drivers, deterrents and impacts Fly-tipping is a significant problem in England. For the 2020/21 year, Local Authorities (LAs) in England dealt with 1.13 million fly-tipping incidents, an increase of 16% from the 980,000 reported in 2019/20. The cost of clearance for larger incidents also increased in the last year (a 6% increase from 2019/20). Additionally, these operational metrics do not capture the full picture as they only include public land. It is important for Government to better understand the main causes and consequences of fly-tipping because it has significant financial, social and environmental impacts which affect communities across the length and breadth of the country. It is at best unsightly, can impact public amenities, and negatively affect people’s perception of where they live and their quality of life. It can also pose risks to the environment and human/animal health. For example, there have been cases where dangerous waste has been deposited near water reservoirs in recent years. Those who fly-tip can also avoid paying disposal costs, impose clean-up costs on taxpayers and private landowners (who can also be responsible in many cases for the costs of clear up), as well as undercutting legitimate waste businesses. Additionally fly-tipping can also undermine achieving a circular economy. If Government can’t deal effectively with it then it becomes harder to achieve recycling and other targets. Despite the continuous efforts of the Government, LAs, National Fly-Tipping Prevention Group, Environment Agency, and charities in tackling fly-tipping, the situation isn’t improving and the problem appears more entrenched than ever. The 2006 Jill Dando Institute project commissioned by Government to look at fly-tipping identified that enforcement had dominated the thinking behind tackling fly-tipping at the expense of a strategic approach. Fifteen years later the focus is still on stronger regulation, with a large reliance on tip-offs, or clues in the waste identifying the perpetrator. This approach has not been as effective as hoped because of the resourcing implications of regulation and enforcement, and more generally hasn’t satisfactorily addressed the drivers behind fly-tipping. This research was commissioned by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in 2021 because it has become increasingly obvious to Government that a more detailed and systematic examination of the factors influencing fly-tipping was necessary, and the expectation is that such a review might help provide better evidence based policy making and influence future strategies and interventions.

year: 2022

title: Te Kauwhanganui o Tāwhiao

authors: Teinakore, Tiare Kata

abstract: Wiremu Tarapīpipi Te Waharoa Tamihana: Kaiwhakawahi Kīngi

I te tau 1892 i kite a Tāwhiao i te hinga mai o te iwi Māori i te rau o te patu a te Pākehā, ka whakatūngia mai ko tōna whare pāremata a Te Kauwhanganui hei pīkau i ēnei taumahatanga. He whare pāremata tēnei i whakatūngia mai i te rohe tonu o Ngāti Hauā, he whare pāremata mō ngā iwi Māori puta noa i Aotearoa, he whare whakatau nawe, he whare whakature kaupapa, he punanga tēnei mō te iwi Māori. Ko Te Kauwhanganui te tāhuhu o tēnei tuhinga whakapae, engari, ko te aronga nui, ko te takenga mai o Te Kauwhanganui i tēwhea ao, te ao Māori, te ao Pākehā rānei? I konei mahuta mai ai ko te kaupapa matua o tēnei tuhinga.
“I pūtake mai Te Kauwhanganui o Tāwhiao i te ao Māori tūturu, i ngā whakaaweawe rānei o te mana whakahaere o te Pākehā?”
Ko tēnei kaupapa ka rukuhia atu mā te huri kōaro ki te rangahau i te mana whakahaere o te ao Māori tūturu. Ka rangahautia ko te mana whakahaere o te iwi Māori i mua i te taenga mai o te Pākehā, kia mahea ai te kite he aha rā ngā tikanga o te ao Māori tūturu. Ka hūpeke atu ki te taenga mai o te Pākehā ki Aotearoa, ka whakaatu i ngā whakaaweawe mana whakahaere o te Pākehā i tōia mai e te Pākehā, ko Te Tiriti o Waitangi, ko Te Kawenata motuhake o Aotearoa ēnei. Ka whakaatu hoki i te pānga o ēnei whakaaweawe ki ngā kōkiritanga, ki ngā whakahoki a te Māori ki Te Tiriti o Waitangi me Te Kawenata motuhake o Aotearoa. Kātahi ka whakamāramahia ngā tikanga o Te Kauwhanganui me te tautoko o ngā pou kōrero i ēnei whakamārama. Ka whakamutua ake me te tātari i ngā hua o ēnei kimihanga, kia taea te kite ko tēwhea te ao ka pūtake mai Te Kauwhanganui, mai i te ao Māori tūturu, mai i ngā whakaaweawe rānei o te mana whakahaere o te Pākehā.

text: Te Kauwhanganui o Tāwhiao Wiremu Tarapīpipi Te Waharoa Tamihana: Kaiwhakawahi Kīngi

I te tau 1892 i kite a Tāwhiao i te hinga mai o te iwi Māori i te rau o te patu a te Pākehā, ka whakatūngia mai ko tōna whare pāremata a Te Kauwhanganui hei pīkau i ēnei taumahatanga. He whare pāremata tēnei i whakatūngia mai i te rohe tonu o Ngāti Hauā, he whare pāremata mō ngā iwi Māori puta noa i Aotearoa, he whare whakatau nawe, he whare whakature kaupapa, he punanga tēnei mō te iwi Māori. Ko Te Kauwhanganui te tāhuhu o tēnei tuhinga whakapae, engari, ko te aronga nui, ko te takenga mai o Te Kauwhanganui i tēwhea ao, te ao Māori, te ao Pākehā rānei? I konei mahuta mai ai ko te kaupapa matua o tēnei tuhinga.
“I pūtake mai Te Kauwhanganui o Tāwhiao i te ao Māori tūturu, i ngā whakaaweawe rānei o te mana whakahaere o te Pākehā?”
Ko tēnei kaupapa ka rukuhia atu mā te huri kōaro ki te rangahau i te mana whakahaere o te ao Māori tūturu. Ka rangahautia ko te mana whakahaere o te iwi Māori i mua i te taenga mai o te Pākehā, kia mahea ai te kite he aha rā ngā tikanga o te ao Māori tūturu. Ka hūpeke atu ki te taenga mai o te Pākehā ki Aotearoa, ka whakaatu i ngā whakaaweawe mana whakahaere o te Pākehā i tōia mai e te Pākehā, ko Te Tiriti o Waitangi, ko Te Kawenata motuhake o Aotearoa ēnei. Ka whakaatu hoki i te pānga o ēnei whakaaweawe ki ngā kōkiritanga, ki ngā whakahoki a te Māori ki Te Tiriti o Waitangi me Te Kawenata motuhake o Aotearoa. Kātahi ka whakamāramahia ngā tikanga o Te Kauwhanganui me te tautoko o ngā pou kōrero i ēnei whakamārama. Ka whakamutua ake me te tātari i ngā hua o ēnei kimihanga, kia taea te kite ko tēwhea te ao ka pūtake mai Te Kauwhanganui, mai i te ao Māori tūturu, mai i ngā whakaaweawe rānei o te mana whakahaere o te Pākehā.

year: 2013