A K antian Take on the Supererogatory

This article presents a K antian alternative to the mainstream approach in ethics concerning the phenomena that are widely thought to require a category of the supererogatory. My view is that the phenomena do not require this category of ( K antian style) imperfect duties. Elsewhere I have written on K ant on this topic; here I shift my focus away from interpretive issues and consider the pros and cons of the K antian approach. What background assumptions would lean one to favour the K antian approach and what sorts would lean one to favour the mainstream approach? I also consider the possibility that in institutional contexts, there is a need for the category of the supererogatory. Here, it seems, we do need to know what we really have to do and what is beyond the call of duty; in this context, however, duty is not the K antian moral notion, but rather is pegged to particular roles, or to the needs of the institution or group or club of which one is a member. But even here, I argue, the notion of the supererogatory is not crucial.