Published 2019-12-01
Keywords
- anthropocentrism,
- biodiversity,
- bioproportionality,
- environmental ethics,
- optimal population
- wilderness ...More
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2019 Freya Mathews
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Abstract
In the early stages of the environment movement, one of the principal objects of conservation was wilderness. In the 1980s, the category of wilderness gave way to that of biodiversity: conservation was reconceived as biodiversity conservation. With this change of categories, the focus of conservation shifted from the saving of vast and abundant terrains of life to the saving of types of living thing, particularly species. A little-noted consequence of this reframing was a reduction in scale: minimum viable populations of species, which set targets under the new biodiversity-based conception of conservation, were often orders of magnitude lower than the populations that might have occurred in wilderness areas. Exclusive focus on the value of diversity thus tended to lead conservationists to lose sight of the value of abundance. To correct this disastrous miscarriage of environmental intentions, a new complementary category is here proposed: bioproportionality. It is not enough to conserve minimum viable populations of all species. The aim should be to optimize such populations. Optimized targets will be estimated by reference to the principle of bioproportionality: the population of each species should be as abundant as is consistent with an ecologically proportionate abundance of adjoining populations of other species. Applied to the human population, this principle will require a dramatic reduction.
Downloads
References
- Asafu-Adjaye, J., et al., 2015. Eco-modernist manifesto. [pdf] Available at: <https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5515d9f9e4b04d5c3198b7bb/t/552d37bbe4b07a7dd69fcdbb/1429026747046/An+Ecomodernist+Manifesto.pdf> [Accessed 29 November 2019].
- Brennan, A., 2008. Environmental ethics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [online] Available at: <https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-environmental/> [Accessed 29 November 2019].
- Crist, E., 2019. Abundant earth. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Devall, B., and Sessions, G. 1985. Deep ecology. Layton UT: Peregrine Smith.
- IPBES, 2019. Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. [pdf] Bonn: IPBES secretariat. Available at: https://ipbes.net/system/tdf/ipbes_7_10_add.1_en_1.pdf?file=1&type=node&id=35329 [Accessed 17 November 2019].
- McDonough, W. and Braungart, M., 2002. Cradle to cradle: remaking the way we make things. New York: North Point Press.
- Mathews, F., 2016. From biodiversity-based conservation to an ethic of bioproportionality. Biological Conservation, 200, pp.140-148
- Quammen, D., 1997. The song of the dodo. London: Pimlico.
- Rolston, H., 1988. Duties to and values in the natural world. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
- Takacs, D., 1996. The idea of biodiversity: philosophies of paradise. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
- Taylor, P., 1986. Respect for nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- Traill, L.W., Bradshaw, J.A., and Brook, B.W., 2007. Minimum viable population size: a meta-analysis of 30 years of published estimates. Biol. Conserv., 139 (1–2), pp.159–166.
- United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, 1992. [pdf] Available at: <https://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf> [Accessed 29 November 2019].
- Whittaker, R.J., and Fernandez-Palacios, J.M. 2007. Island biogeography: ecology, evolution and conservation. Oxford: Oxford UP.