Environment

Lab-grown meat might lessen the instances of animal cruelty, but its invention also betrays an inability to keep our appetites in check.

How can we perceive the rights and interests of entities that exist beyond our human interest in them?

Under what conditions might a creature to become a rights-bearer? Who should get to decide?

Is the potential threat to human life and harm done to animals enough to overcome business interests and property rights?

Under what conditions should US agencies be allowed to interfere with the governance of tribal lands?

In what ways does our position in relation to domesticated animals place additional duties of care upon us?

What obligation do we have to restoring and preserving ecosystems and does that obligation extend to include predators?

Now is the perfect time to rethink our relationship with meat — the industry behind it and the baggage that comes with it.

The insincerity in Rio Tinto's public statements point to a basic misunderstanding regarding the appropriateness of blame and the demand of accountability.

As many police practices come under increasing scrutiny, we must consider the role of nonhuman animals in police forces.

The concerted effort required to overcome our current predicament is a proving ground for the battle that still awaits us.

The current crisis has provided a new context to evaluate our relationship to meat and the machinery that produces it. Can we justify the cost of this "vital" labor?

The current crisis should persuade us to reconsider our relationship to the natural world.

Our habitual practices are causing harm and manipulations to market forces can't produce lasting change. What are we to do?

The Coastal GasLink pipeline standoff highlights a number of concerns of legitimacy and puts pressure on different entities' claim to the right to rule.

The Washington Post's recent profile of the "Anti-Greta" raises concerns over journalistic ethics. Does giving space to fringe beliefs always run afoul of the duty to avoid false equivalence?

What is the proper metric to use in deciding another species' fate? What do we need to know in order to justify extinction?

Are local initiatives really a feasible substitute for large-scale regulation when it comes to environmental issues like air pollution?

How can we balance accuracy against alarmism? How can we avoid defeatism and instead inspire action? What does scientific accuracy demand?

Should climate change policies aim at justice or fairness?