Abstract
What exactly does the environment, the biosphere, and biodiversity entail? To what extent are they in crisis currently, what are the drivers behind this crisis, and why is it important that one should do something about this crisis? What exactly should one focus on when protecting the environment, the biosphere, and biodiversity, and why should one do so? In this chapter, an overview is given of the conceptual, philosophical, and ethical challenges related to finding answers to these questions. The crux of this discussion is devoted to different kinds of values that can be used to justify protection. The most commonly used arguments for the protection of the environment, the biosphere, and biodiversity appeal to their instrumental value. In this context, distinctions are made between the direct use value, indirect use value, amenity value, option value, and existence value that humans can derive from protection of the environment, the biosphere, and biodiversity. While these values can be emphasized in isolation from one another, causing either a destructive overemphasis of use value or a romantic overemphasis of the nonconsumptive (use) value of the environment, the biosphere, and biodiversity, the notion of ecosystem services is discussed as a framework within which these instrumental values can be combined serving as they do as the basis of human well-being. On the other hand, intrinsic value arguments are often emphasized in environmental ethics to counter the reduction of the environment, the biosphere, and biodiversity to mere commodities, or to objects of management at arm’s length from humans and thus at their disposal to use at will. Under the best interpretations of these intrinsic value arguments, the focus falls on a respectful reverence for the environment, the biosphere, and biodiversity, the components that make them up, as well as the ecosystemic and evolutionary processes they entail – conceptualized not as commodities but as prerequisites for the existence, continued evolution, and flourishing of all life on earth. Under this interpretation of intrinsic value, the use of the environment, the biosphere, and biodiversity is not precluded but strongly qualified in that any such use should be careful, considerate, and equitable to enhance and not undermine the conditions under which life (including both human and nonhuman life) can continue to evolve and flourish on earth. In the introductory parts of this chapter, discussion is devoted to issues around definitions of, and conceptual overlaps and differences between environment, the biosphere, and biodiversity, as well as conceptual difficulties that are caused by the vagueness of these terms, efforts to define them objectively, and approaches to them that only emphasize their constituent elements, neglecting a holistic vision that also emphasize the ecosystemic processes they entail and their evolution over time. This chapter concludes with an outlook on the future of the environment, the biosphere, and biodiversity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Afeissa, H. (2009). Intrinsic and instrumental value. In J. B. Callicott & R. Frodeman (Eds.), Encyclopedia of environmental ethics and philosophy (Gale, cengage learning, Vol. 1, pp. 529–531). Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA.
Callicott, J. B. (1999). Beyond the land ethic: More essays in environmental philosophy. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Carson, R. (2002). Silent spring. New York: Mariner Books. (1st. Pub. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1962).
Costanza, R. (1991). Ecological economics: The science and management of sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press.
Davis, M. A. (2009). Invasion biology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ehrenfeld, D. (1988). Why put a value on biodiversity? In E. O. Wilson (Ed.), Biodiversity. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Faith, D. P. (2008). Biodiversity. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition). URL: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/biodiversity/
Fox, W. (1995). Toward a transpersonal ecology: Developing new foundations for environmentalism. Totnes, Devon: A Resurgence Book.
Gardiner, S. M. (2011). A perfect moral storm. The ethical tragedy of climate change. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gaston, K. J. (Ed.). (1996). Biodiversity: A biology of numbers and difference. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, New Series, 162 (3859), 1243–1248. Also available at: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/162/3859/1243.full
Holland, A. (2001). Sustainability. In D. Jamieson (Ed.), A companion to environmental philosophy (pp. 390–401). Malden, MA/Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Jacobs, M. (1995). Sustainable development, capital substitution and economic humility: A response to Beckerman. Environmental Values, 4, 57–68.
Johnson, D. L., Ambrose, S. H., Bassett, T. J., Bowen, M. L., Crummey, D. E., Isaacson, J. S., Johnson, D. N., Lamb, P., Saul, M., & Winter-Nelson, A. E. (1997). Meanings of environmental terms. Journal of Environmental Quality, 26, 581–589.
Kempton, W. M., Boster, J. S., & Hartley, J. A. (1995). Environmental values in American culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Laurance, W. F. (1999). Reflections on the tropical deforestation crisis. Biological Conservation, 91, 109–117.
Luck, G. W., Daily, G. C., & Ehrlich, P. R. (2003). Population diversity and ecosystem services. Trends in ecology and evolution, 18(7), 331–336.
Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. l., Randers, J., & Behrens III, W. W. (1972). The limits to growth. A report to the Club of Rome. New York: Universe Books. Also available at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/2682517/Club-of-Rome-Report
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis, p. vi, available at: http://www.maweb.org/documents/document.356.aspx.pdf
Morin, E. (1999). Homeland EARTH: A manifesto for the new millennium (Advances in systems theory, complexity and the human sciences). London/England: Hampton Press.
Næss, A. (1973). The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement. Inquiry, 16(1), 95–100.
Norton, B. G. (2003). Searching for sustainability. Interdisciplinary essays in the philosophy of conservation biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
O’Neill, J., Holland, A., & Light, A. (2008). Environmental values. London/New York: Routledge.
Pimm, S. L., Russell, G. J., Gittleman, J. L., & Brooks, T. M. (1995). The future of biodiversity. Science, 269, 347–350.
Primack, R. B. (2006). Essentials of conservation biology (4th ed.). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
Raup, D. M. (1991). Extinction: Bad genes or bad luck? New York: W.W. Norton.
Reaka-Kudla, M. L., Wilson, D. E., & Wilson, E. O. (Eds.). (1997). Biodiversity II: Understanding and protecting our biological resources. Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.
Rolston, H., III. (2001). Biodiversity. In D. Jamieson (Ed.), A companion to environmental philosophy (pp. 402–415). Malden, MA/Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Routley, R. (1973). Is there a need for a new, an environmental ethic? In Proceedings of the 15th World Congress of Philosophy (Vol. 1, pp. 205–210). Sophia: Sophia Press.
Solow, R. M. (1993). Sustainability: An economist’s perspective. In R. Dorfman & N. S. Dorfman (Eds.), Economics of the environment: Selected readings (3rd ed., pp. 178–187). New York: W.W. Norton.
Soulé, M. E., Estes, J. A., Berger, J., & Del Rio, C. M. (2003). Ecological effectiveness: Conservation goals for interactive species. Conservation Biology, 17(5), 1238–1250.
Stern, N. (2010). A blueprint for a safer planet: How we can save the world and create prosperity. London: Vintage Books.
Swilling, M., & Annecke, E. (2012). Just transitions. Explorations of sustainability in an unfair world. Claremont: UCT Press (in South Africa). Tokyo: United Nations University Press (in North America).
TEEB. (2010). The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: Mainstreaming the economics of nature: A synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. Hosted by UNEP, this report is available at: http://www.teebweb.org/Portals/25/TEEB%20Synthesis/TEEB_SynthReport_09_2010_online.pdf
The Ecologist. (1972). A blueprint for survival. The Ecologist, 2 (1). Also available at: http://www.theecologist.info/key27.html
The Royal Society. (2012). People and the planet. The Royal Society Science Policy Centre report 01/12. Also available at: http://royalsociety.org/uploadedFiles/Royal_Society_Content/policy/projects/people-planet/2012-04-25-PeoplePlanet.pdf
Turner, G. (2008). A comparison of ‘The limits to growth’ with thirty years of reality. Canberra: Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO).
WCED. (1987). Our common future. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development to the United Nations. Available at: http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm Known as the Brundtland Report, also published in 1987 at Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, E. O. (Ed.). (1988). Biodiversity. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Wilson, E. O. (1992). The diversity of life. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this entry
Cite this entry
Hattingh, J. (2014). Protection of the Environment, the Biosphere and Biodiversity. In: ten Have, H., Gordijn, B. (eds) Handbook of Global Bioethics. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2512-6_80
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2512-6_80
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2511-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2512-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and Law