Skip to main content

Questioning the ecosystem services argument for biodiversity conservation

Biodiversity and Conservation volume 17, pages 781–790 (2008)Cite this article

Abstract

One of the central justifications for the conservation of biodiversity is the notion that species diversity is essential for the maintenance of ecosystem services. However, an important observation overlooked by proponents of this argument is that most ecosystem services are provided not by whole ecosystems, but by any group of species that fulfils certain basic functional criteria. Distinguishing between services that are resilient in response to species decline, and those that are not, is a far less challenging task than identifying the precise influence on ecosystem functioning of rare species. Conservationists have been almost unanimous in their failure to acknowledge this distinction between resilient and sensitive ecosystem services. Not only does this threaten the credibility of conservation science, but also increases the likelihood that natural area management becomes hijacked by the demand that ecosystem service provision be made the dominant management criteria.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  • Barry D, Oelschlaeger M (1996) A science for survival: values and conservation biology. Conserv Biol 10:905–911

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botkin DB (1990) Discordant harmonies: a new ecology for the twenty-first century. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Chirac J (2005) Address given by the President of France at the UNESCO Biodiversity: science and governance conference, Paris. http://www.ambafrance-uk.org. Cited 21 Aug 2006

  • Daily GC et al (1997) Ecosystem services: benefits supplied to human societies by natural ecosystems. Issues Ecol 2:1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Eamus D et al (2005) Ecosystem services: an ecophysiological examination. Aust J Bot 53:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfeld D (1981) The arrogance of humanism. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfeld D (1988) Why put a value on biodiversity? In: Wilson EO (ed) Biodiversity. National Academy Press, Washington, pp 212–216

  • Ehrlich PR, Ehrlich AH (1982) Extinction: the causes and consequences of the disappearance of species. Victor Gollancz, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlich PR et al (1997) No middle way on the environment. Atl Mon 280:98–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Faith DP, Ferrier S, Walker PA (2004) The ED strategy: how species-level surrogates indicate general biodiversity patterns through an ‘environmental diversity’ perspective. J Biogeogr 31:1207–1217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghilarov A (1996) What does ‘biodiversity’ mean—scientific problem or convenient myth? Trends Ecol Evol 11:304–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo ZW, Xiao XM, Li DM (2000) An assessment of ecosystem services: water flow regulation and hydroelectric power production. Ecol Appl 10:925–936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding R, Fisher E (1999) Introducing the precautionary principle. In: Harding R, Fisher E (eds) Perspectives on the precautionary principle. The Federation Press, Leichhardt, pp 2–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Hector A et al (2001) Conservation implications of the link between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Oecologia 129:624–628

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooper DU et al (2005) Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: a consensus of current knowledge. Ecol Monogr 75:3–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes JB, Petchey OL (2001) Merging perspectives on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Trends Ecol Evol 16:222–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kremen C (2005) Managing ecosystem services: what do we need to know about their ecology? Ecol Lett 8:468–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawler SP, Armesto JJ, Kareiva P (2002) How relevant to conservation are studies linking biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. In: Kinzig AP, Pacala SW, Tilman D (eds) The functional consequences of biodiversity: empirical progress and theoretical extensions. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 294–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerdau M, Slobodkin LB (2002) Trace gas emissions and species-dependent ecosystem services. Trends Ecol Evol 17:309–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luck GW, Daily GC, Ehrlich PR (2003) Population diversity and ecosystem services. Trends Ecol Evol 18:331–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyons KG, Brigham CA, Traut BH, Schwartz MW (2005) Rare species and ecosystem functioning. Conserv Biol 19:1019–1024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer P (2006) Biodiversity—the appreciation of different thought styles and values helps to clarify the term. Restor Ecol 14:105–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2003) Ecosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment. World Resources Institute, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: biodiversity synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers N (1996) Environmental services of biodiversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:2764–2769

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Naeem S et al (1999) Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: maintaining natural life support processes. Issues Ecol 4:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill RV (2001) Is it time to bury the ecosystem concept? Ecology 82:3275–3284

    Google Scholar 

  • Pope John Paul II (1999) Ecclesia in America (Apostolic exhortation, Mexico City, Mexico). http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations. Cited 1 January 2007

  • Posey DA (ed) (1999) Cultural and spiritual values of biodiversity. United Nations Environment Program, Nairobi

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridder B (2007) The naturalness versus wildness debate: ambiguity, inconsistency, and unnattainable objectivity. Restor Ecol 15: 8–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig ML (2003) Win-win ecology: how the earth’s species can survive in the midst of human enterprise. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sagoff M (1997) Muddle or muddle through? Takings jurisprudence meets the Endangered Species Act. William Mary Law Rev 38: 825–993

    Google Scholar 

  • SER (Society for Ecological Restoration) (2004) The SER international primer on ecological restoration. SER International, Tuscon

    Google Scholar 

  • Slobodkin LB (2001) The good, the bad and the reified. Evol Ecol Res 3:1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg PF (1998) Defining the global biodiversity mandate: implications for international policy. Intl Environ Affair 10:113–130

    Google Scholar 

  • Takacs D (1996) The idea of biodiversity: philosophies of paradise. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor P (2005) Beyond conservation: a wildland strategy. Earthscan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Tokeshi M (1999) Species and coexistence: ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Blackwell Science, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Tudge C (1989) The rise and fall of Homo sapiens sapiens. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 325:479–488

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van den Belt H, Gremmen B (2002) Between precautionary principle and ‘sound science’: distributing the burdens of proof. J Agric Environ Ethics 15:103–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wardle DA et al (2000) Biodiversity and ecosystem function: an issue in ecology. Bull Ecol Soc Am 81:235–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Weesie P, van Andel J (2003) On biodiversity and its valuation (Research Report by the Centre for Development Studies, University of Groningen, Netherlands). http://cds.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/root/ResRep/2003/200218. Cited 1 January 2007

  • Western D (2001) Human-modified ecosystems and future evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:5458–5465

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania, Locked Bag 78, Hobart, TAS, 7001, Australia

    Ben Ridder

Authors
  1. Ben Ridder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ben Ridder.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ridder, B. Questioning the ecosystem services argument for biodiversity conservation. Biodivers Conserv 17, 781–790 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-008-9316-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-008-9316-5

Keywords

  • Biodiversity
  • Ecosystem collapse
  • Ecosystem services
  • Intangible values
  • Resilience
  • Species extinction