Post on 20-Jan-2017
transcript
Rational Pessimism or Optimism in Conservation?An evaluation of two perspectives
A Quick Survey
Do you think we can successfully protect most species on the planet from extinction?What about protecting ecosystems from destruction?Do you think the planet will support even human life in 500 years? 1,000 years? 10,000 years?
Overview
1. State of the Planet2. The Pessimistic View3. The Optimistic View4. What are you?
1. State of the Planet
The Living Planet Index is a calculation of population trends for 3,038 vertebrate species showing a 52% decline.
1. State of the Planet (cont.)
Of sub-component LPIs for marine, freshwater, and terrestrial populations, freshwater is doing far worse with a 76% decline.
1. State of the Planet (cont.)
The terrestrial LPI of populations inside protected areas shows a decline of 18 per cent between 1970 and 2010
1. State of the Planet (cont.)
1. State of the Planet (cont.)
1. State of the Planet (cont.)
2. The Pessimistic View
2. The Pessimistic View (cont.)Stephen K. Meyer. 2006. The End of the Wild.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.“The broad path for biological evolution is now set for the next several million years. And in this sense the extinction crisis-- the race to save the composition, structure, and organization of biodiversity as it exists today--is over, and we have lost.”"We have lost the wild for now. Perhaps in 5-10 million years it will return."
2. The Pessimistic View (cont.)
2. The Pessimistic View (cont.)Mechanisms
Local Disturbances Encroachment of built environment into natural
environment Over-exploitation of natural resources
Global forces make damage “irreversible” Climate change Globalization Increased consumption
2. The Pessimistic View (cont.)
Good-bye?
2. The Pessimistic View (cont.)
Hello?
2. The Pessimistic View (cont.)Counter-Arguments
The assumptions are wrong Consumption falls with change in consciousness? Global population eventually radically decreases? Technology reduces impacts?
2. The Pessimistic View (cont.)Counter-Arguments
Conservationists will develop effective interventions Rights-based management Conservation criminology Technologies improve reserve effectiveness
2. The Pessimistic View (cont.)
Counter-Arguments No one will care
Higher standard of living Shifting baselines “Manicured” green spaces
will still exist Diversity of (artificial)
intelligence will vastly multiply
3. The Optimistic View
3. The Optimistic View (cont.)Matt Ridley. 2011. The Rational Optimist: How
Prosperity Evolves). Harper Perennial.“Somewhere in Africa more than 100,000 years ago…A Species began to add to its habits, generation by generation, without (much) changing its genes. What made this possible was exchange, the swapping of things and services between individuals…”“The future of the Species was bright, though it did not know it.”
3. The Optimistic View (cont.)
3. The Optimistic View (cont.)Mechanisms
Spread of progressive ideas (democracy, enlightenment values, scientific inquiry)
Continued innovation through exchange of ideas
Pessimism is genetically/culturally favored
3. The Optimistic View (cont.)
Good-bye?
3. The Optimistic View (cont.)
Hello?
3. The Optimistic View (cont.)Counter-Arguments
There is no technological fix to our immediate pollution problems
3. The Optimistic View (cont.)
Counter-Arguments People will not care about saving “the wild”
3. The Optimistic View (cont.)
Counter-Arguments Pessimism is the reason our fears are never
realized
4. Which are you? Are you a rational optimist (like Ridley) or a
pessimist (like Meyer)?
Are you somewhere in between?
Is it possible to be both?
Closing Thought
“[W]ith or without either our help or hindrances the earth’s reefs will go and then come again, as long as the sun delivers its rays and the waters flow. Whatever role we might play in the next great extinction will surely have less effect on the tenacious reemergence of reef-builders than it will on us. Reefs, we know, can survive without us. The opposite may not be true.”
- Julia Whitty, The Fragile Edge