Breaking through the Crisis in Marine Conservation and Management: Insights from the Philosophies of Ed Ricketts

Abstract:  Over the last decade, 2 major U.S. commissions on ocean policy and a wide range of independent sources have argued that ocean ecosystems are in a period of crisis and that current policies are inadequate to prevent further ecological damage. These sources have advocated ecosystem-based management as an approach to address conservation issues in the oceans, but managers remain uncertain as to how to implement ecosystem-based approaches in the real world. We argue that the philosophies of Edward F. Ricketts, a mid-20th-century marine ecologist, offer a framework and clear guidance for taking an ecosystem approach to marine conservation. Ricketts' philosophies, which were grounded in basic observations of natural history, espoused building a holistic picture of the natural world, including the influence of humans, through repeated observation. This approach, when applied to conservation, grounds management in what is observable in nature, encourages early action in the face of uncertainty, and supports an adaptive approach to management as new information becomes available. Ricketts' philosophy of "breaking through," which focuses on getting beyond crisis and conflict through honest debate of different parties' needs (rather than forcing compromise of differing positions), emphasizes the social dimension of natural resource management. New observational technologies, long-term ecological data sets, and especially advances in the social sciences made available since Ricketts' time greatly enhance the utility of Ricketts' philosophy of marine conservation.     

Revisiting two dogmas of conservation science

Conservation science is a morally motivated field, with implicit and explicit values built into its practice. As such, conservationists must engage with conservation ethics to interrogate underlying values. We examine cutting-edge ecological science and contemporary ethics to revisit two conservation norms that have become dogmatic in the field: ecological collectives, but not individual animals, are valuable and anthropomorphism should be staunchly avoided. Emerging studies demonstrate that individuals and their intraspecific variation can be instrumentally valuable for conservation science, and there is an emerging consensus within environmental philosophy around the moral worth of individuals. Thus, we suggest conservation science should explicitly recognize the value of individuals. We also argue that avoiding anthropomorphism is detrimental to conservation because critical anthropomorphism enables a more nuanced scientific approach—allowing conservationists to ask enlightened questions with creativity and compassion. We provide evidence that both dogmatic norms are scientifically and morally outdated and propose new normative values to push conservation towards more robust science and ethical practice.     

What room for politics and change in global climate governance? Addressing gender in co-benefits and safeguards

Questions of equity, gender, power and rights are central to environmental justice in climate mitigation schemes such as REDD+ (Reducing Emissions From Deforestation and Degradation). Drawing on the ideas of co-benefits and safeguards, the strategies for challenging mainstream discourse on gender in REDD+ – from the outside and within – are examined of two organisations that have attempted to bring a political concept – gender – into the largely technical discourse of climate policy. The analysis points to the risks of co-option that women’s organisations face, trying to challenge and change the mainstream discourse on gender in climate policy-making. The need for diverse and flexible strategies for resistance and influence in order to seize opportunities that may arise in countering the depoliticising force of global climate governance are highlighted.     

Emotion as a source of moral understanding in conservation

Recent debates around the meaning and implications of compassionate conservation suggest that some conservationists consider emotion a false and misleading basis for moral judgment and decision making. We trace these beliefs to a long-standing, gendered sociocultural convention and argue that the disparagement of emotion as a source of moral understanding is both empirically and morally problematic. According to the current scientific and philosophical understanding, reason and emotion are better understood as partners, rather than opposites. Nonetheless, the two have historically been seen as separate, with reason elevated in association with masculinity and emotion (especially nurturing emotion) dismissed or delegitimated in association with femininity. These associations can be situated in a broader, dualistic, and hierarchical logic used to maintain power for a dominant male (White, able-bodied, upper class, heterosexual) human class. We argue that emotion should be affirmed by conservationists for the novel and essential insights it contributes to conservation ethics. We consider the specific example of compassion and characterize it as an emotional experience of interdependence and shared vulnerability. This experience highlights conservationists’ responsibilities to individual beings, enhancing established and widely accepted beliefs that conservationists have a duty to protect populations, species, and ecosystems (or biodiversity). We argue compassion, thus understood, should be embraced as a core virtue of conservation.     

How the diversity of human concepts of nature affects conservation of biodiversity

Protecting nature has become a global concern. However, the very idea of nature is problematic. We examined the etymological and semantic diversity of the word used to translate nature in a conservation context in 76 of the primary languages of the world to identify the different relationships between humankind and nature. Surprisingly, the number of morphemes (distinct etymological roots) used by 7 billion people was low. Different linguistic superfamilies shared the same etymon across large cultural areas that correlate with the distribution of major religions. However, we found large differences in etymological meanings among these words, echoing the semantic differences and historical ambiguity of the contemporary European concept of nature. The principal current Western meaning of nature in environmental public policy, conservation science, and environmental ethics–that which is not a human artifact–appears to be relatively rare and recent and to contradict the vision of nature in most other cultures, including those of pre-Christian Europe. To avoid implicit cultural bias and hegemony–and thus to be globally intelligible and effective–it behooves nature conservationists to take into account this semantic diversity when proposing conservation policies and implementing conservation practices.     

理解生态文明:从哲学思想到国家发展战略

系统易懂地阐释生态文明概念,对于帮助国际社会清晰地理解和认识中国的生态文明,以及在全球视野下推进生态文明建设至关重要。中国政府提出的生态文明建设已经从过去传统的哲学思想上升为国家的发展战略,是具体的、可理解的、可操作的国家治理概念和术语。理解生态文明建设的要点包括:建设生态文明是中国国家发展总体战略的核心构成,是中国国家治国理念和发展战略的转变,是国家环境与发展转型的整体性战略,其路径是将生态文明融入到经济、政治、社会和文化等领域建设的全过程和各方面,其关键手段和工具是大幅提高经济绿色化程度,其主阵地和根本措施是加强环境保护。     

Latina Feminist Metaphysics and Genetically Engineered Foods

In this paper I critique two popular, non-scientific attitudes toward genetically engineered foods. In doing so, I will be employing the concepts of ambiguity, purity/impurity, control/resistance, and unity/diversity as developed by Latina feminist metaphysicians. I begin by casting a critical eye toward a specific anti-biotech account of transgenic food crops, an account that I will argue relies on an anti-feminist metaphysics. I then cast that same critical eye toward a specific pro-biotech account, arguing that it also relies on such an anti-feminist metaphysics. I will argue further that this metaphysics yields a less accurate account of genetics. I end by arguing that if we adopt a Latina feminist metaphysics we can more accurately understand plants, genetics, and genetic engineering.     

ECO-ENGINEERING-THE CHALLENGE OF RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT1

It is presumed that the present environmental thrust is not a wholly transitory fad; that there will be a residual impact on American society which will demand greater consideration in the future of ecological and environmental values by resource developers and public works agencies. An example is cited to show the validity of the environmental thrust and the severe consequences of ignoring it under the present emphasis on this aspect of resource development. An attempt is made to understand some of the reasons for the dramatic change in public attitude toward the environment and opposition to projects of apparent benefit to society. It is suggested that basic changes in philosophy and concept will be necessary in the field of resource development. Some broad ecological and developmental guidelines are provided in the interest of implementing environmental considerations. Finally, those involved in resource development and public works are challenged to accept the concept of eco-engineering; a concept combining the competing elements of resource development and conservation.     

Science and values in risk assessment: The case of deliberate release of genetically engineered organisms

To make more responsible decisions regarding risk and to understand disagreements and controversies in risk assessments, it is important to know how and where values are infused into risk assessment and how they are embedded in the conclusions. In this article an attempt is made to disentangle the relationship of science and values in decision-making concerning the deliberate release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into the environment. This exercise in applied philosophy of science is based on Helen Longino's contextual empiricism which attempts to reconcile the objectivity of science with its social and cultural construction. Longino distinguishes different levels of research on which values apparently contextual with respect to a given research program can shape the knowledge emerging from that program. Her scheme is applied for locating and identifying the values that affect environment risk assessments of the field experiments with GMOs. The article concludes with some provisional suggestions for the decision process and the role of scientists in it.