Distributive Justice and Scarce Natural Resources
SOC 331 Week 3 DQ 2
- Ashford 4: – Week 3 – Discussion 2
Distributive Justice and Scarce Natural Resources
In Chapter 3 of the text, the author calls attention to how struggles for scarce natural resources will pose increasingly difficult problems of distributive justice in the future, on both the local and global levels. “Case 3.4 – Fracking Friction” (in Section 3.4) explores this issue in the context of fracking for natural gas.
Suppose that the connection between fracking and adverse health effects is as yet an unproven possibility. Do individuals’ health interests outweigh the property interests of energy companies in withholding information about fracking chemicals, which they claim are trade-secrets? Why or why not?
Your initial post must, from the perspective of distributive justice, explain your response to the above questions as they relate to Case 3.4. Consider the issue from both sides (the pros and cons). Incorporate arguments that draw upon libertarian, utilitarian, and egalitarian views of distributive justice.
To help you successfully complete this discussion, review the following required resources:
- Fracking secrets by thousands keep U.S. clueless on wells
- Fracking: Abundant energy, but at what cost?
- Is fracking making people sick? [Radio broadcast]
- Fracking our food supply
Your initial post should be at least 300 words in length. Support your claims with examples from at least two of the required resources for this discussion, and properly cite any references. Respond to at least two of your classmates’ posts by Day 7 whose viewpoints are different from yours. Each peer response must be at least 125 words. Stimulate critical thinking by contrasting your perspective with your classmate’s and explaining yours, or by asking your classmate a question and explaining why your question is significant.
Leave a Reply
Want to join the discussion?Feel free to contribute!