Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Ecosystem‐Service Science and the Way Forward for Conservation

Ecosystem‐Service Science and the Way Forward for Conservation Conservation biology began life as a crisis discipline, its central tenet to understand and help reverse losses of biodiversity and habitat. Those losses continue unabated, implying that, as a discipline, we are failing in our central charge. A growing number of conservation biologists are therefore looking for a new way forward, and we believe that an increased focus on ecosystem services provides it. Yet the conservation community remains deeply, and sometimes very publicly ( McCauley 2006 ), divided over how much emphasis ecosystem‐service approaches should receive relative to those based solely on moral suasion. Put bluntly, will we achieve greater conservation success by protecting nature for its own sake or for our own sake? This dichotomy highlights extremes of a continuum that was prominent a century ago. Nature for nature's sake, often blended with aesthetic appeals, can be traced most notably to the preservationist John Muir. Conservation through utilization can be traced to another icon, forester Gifford Pinchot. These complementary strands, each valid, powerful, and deeply rooted in the conservation movement, clashed long ago, especially in the United States. But just as Muir's writings acknowledge a role for utilitarianism and Pinchot's a keen awareness of the intrinsic value http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Conservation Biology Wiley

Ecosystem‐Service Science and the Way Forward for Conservation

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/ecosystem-service-science-and-the-way-forward-for-conservation-c05Ht5TYdb

References (8)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0888-8892
eISSN
1523-1739
DOI
10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00821.x
pmid
18173455
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Conservation biology began life as a crisis discipline, its central tenet to understand and help reverse losses of biodiversity and habitat. Those losses continue unabated, implying that, as a discipline, we are failing in our central charge. A growing number of conservation biologists are therefore looking for a new way forward, and we believe that an increased focus on ecosystem services provides it. Yet the conservation community remains deeply, and sometimes very publicly ( McCauley 2006 ), divided over how much emphasis ecosystem‐service approaches should receive relative to those based solely on moral suasion. Put bluntly, will we achieve greater conservation success by protecting nature for its own sake or for our own sake? This dichotomy highlights extremes of a continuum that was prominent a century ago. Nature for nature's sake, often blended with aesthetic appeals, can be traced most notably to the preservationist John Muir. Conservation through utilization can be traced to another icon, forester Gifford Pinchot. These complementary strands, each valid, powerful, and deeply rooted in the conservation movement, clashed long ago, especially in the United States. But just as Muir's writings acknowledge a role for utilitarianism and Pinchot's a keen awareness of the intrinsic value

Journal

Conservation BiologyWiley

Published: Dec 1, 2007

There are no references for this article.