Advertisement

Towards EcoEvoEthics

  • Patrick Blandin
Chapter
Part of the Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science book series (BSPS, volume 296)

Abstract

Ecology long considered the natural world as an #x201C;equilibrium world#x201D;. This view culminated in the 1950s with the ecosystem paradigm, which was strengthened by the idea that the reciprocal selection of interacting species should produce ecological stability. At the end of the 1940s, Aldo Leopold's Land Ethic valued the stability of natural communities, and the balance of nature became a key issue for conservationists. Nowadays, there is a shift towards a co-change paradigm: interacting biological and non-biological entities are co-changing through a transactional web that forms the biosphere. Consequently, as ecology meets evolution, the conservation target must shift from the stability of ecological systems to their adaptability. Simultaneously, there is a need for an eco-evolutionary ethics which assumes that we and our co-evolving aliens are living in a changing world. Difficult issues should therefore be addressed, such as the uniqueness and intrinsic value of living entities versus the substitutability of functionally redundant species, and the evolutionary value of diversity. Finally, beyond the biocentrism versus anthropocentrism debate, this EcoEvoEthics should affirm that a thing is right when it tends to enhance the biosphere's capacity to evolve.

Keywords

Environmental Ethic Evolutionary Ethic Living Entity Land Ethic Ecosystem Concept 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

References

  1. Acot, P. (ed). 1998. The European origins of scientific ecology, 2 vols. Amsterdam: Overseas Publishers Association/Gordon and Breach Publishers/Editions des Archives Contemporaines.Google Scholar
  2. Ayala, F. 2006. Biology to ethics: An evolutionist’s view of human nature. In Evolutionary ethics and contemporary biology, eds. G. Boniolo and G. De Anna, 141–158. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Balée, W. 1992. People of the fallow: A historical ecology of foraging in lowland South America. In Conservation of neotropical forests: Working from traditional resource use, eds. K.H. Redford and C. Padoch, 35–57. New York/Oxford: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Balée, W. 1995. Historical ecology of Amazonia. In Indigenous peoples and the future of Amazonia: An ecological anthropology of an endangered world, ed. L.E. Sponsel, 97–110. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bergandi, D. 1995. “Reductionist holism”: An oxymoron or a philosophical chimaera of E.P. Odum’s systems ecology? Ludus Vitalis 3(5): 145–180.Google Scholar
  6. Bergandi, D. 1999. Les métamorphoses de l’organicisme en écologie: de la communauté végétale aux écosystèmes. Revue d’histoire des sciences 52(1): 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bergandi, D. 2000. Eco-cybernetics: The ecology and cybernetics of missing emergences. Kybernetes 29: 928–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bergandi, D. 2007. Niveaux d’organisation: évolution, écologie et transaction. In Le tout et les parties dans les systèmes naturels, ed. T. Martin, 47–55. Paris: Vuibert.Google Scholar
  9. Bergandi, D., and P. Blandin. 1998. Holism vs. reductionism: Do ecosystem ecology and landscape ecology clarify the debate? Acta Biotheoretica 46: 185–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Birnbacher, D. 2004. Limits to sustainability in nature conservation. In Philosophy and biodiversity, eds. M. Oksanen and J. Pietarinen, 180–195. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blandin, P. 1980. Evolution des écosystèmes et stratégies cénotiques. In Recherches d’écologie théorique. Les stratégies adaptatives, eds. R. Barbault, P. Blandin, and J.A. Meyer, 221–235. Paris: Maloine.Google Scholar
  12. Blandin, P. 2004. Biodiversity between science and ethics. In Soil zoology for sustainable development in the 21st century, eds. S.N. Shakir Hanna and W.Z.A. Mikhail, 3–35. Cairo: Cairo University.Google Scholar
  13. Blandin, P., R. Barbault, and C. Lecordier. 1976. Réflexions sur la notion d’écosystème: le concept de stratégie cénotique. Bulletin d’Ecologie 7: 391–410.Google Scholar
  14. Boniolo, G., and G. De Anna (eds.). 2006. Evolutionary ethics and contemporary biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Callicott, J.B. 1989. In defense of the land ethic: Essays in environmental philosophy. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  16. Chevassus-au-Louis, B., S. Bielsa, G. Martin, J.-L. Pujol, D. Richard, and J.-M. Salles. 2009. Approche économique de la biodiversité et des services liés aux écosystèmes. Contribution à la décision publique. Rapport du groupe de travail. Paris: Premier Ministre, Centre d’analyse stratégique.Google Scholar
  17. Clements, F.E. 1916. Plant succession: An analysis of the development of vegetation. Washington, DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Clermont, R. de, A. Chappellier, L. de Nussac, F. Le Cerf, and C. Valois (eds.). 1925. Premier congrès international pour la protection de la nature, faune et flore, sites et monuments naturels (Paris, 31 May – 2 June 1923). Rapports, vœux, réalisations. Paris: Société Nationale d’Acclimatation de France/Ligue Française pour la Protection des Oiseaux/Société pour la Protection des Paysages de France.Google Scholar
  19. Crumley, C.L., and W.H. Marquardt (eds.). 1987. Regional dynamics: Burgundian landscapes in historical perspective. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  20. Dewey, J., and A.F. Bentley. 1949. Knowing and the known. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
  21. Dorst, J. 1965. Avant que nature meure. Paris: Delachaux et Niestlé.Google Scholar
  22. Flahault, C., and C. Schröter. 1910. Rapport sur la nomenclature phytogéographique. In Actes du IIIème congrès international de botanique, Bruxelles 1910, ed. E. de Wildeman, 131–142. Bruxelles: A. De Boeck.Google Scholar
  23. Forbes, S.A. 1887/1925. The lake as a microcosm. Bulletin of the Scientific Association of Peoria, Illinois 1: 77–87. Reprinted in Illinois Natural History Survey Bulletin 15(9): 537–550.Google Scholar
  24. Forman, R.T.T., and M. Godron. 1986. Landscape ecology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  25. Frankel, O.H. 1974. Genetic conservation: Our evolutionary responsibility. Genetics 78: 53–65.Google Scholar
  26. Frankel, O.H., and M.E. Soulé. 1981. Conservation and evolution. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Ghilarov, A.M. 2000. Ecosystem functioning and intrinsic value of biodiversity. Oikos 90: 408–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Golley, F.B. 1991. The ecosystem concept: A search for order. Ecological Research 6: 129–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Golley, F.B. 1993. A history of the ecosystem concept in ecology. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Goodman, D. 1975. The theory of diversity-stability relationships in ecology. The Quarterly Review of Biology 50: 237–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Grove, R.H. 1992. Origins of western environmentalism. Scientific American 267: 42–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Harroy, J.-P. 1949. Définition de la protection de la nature. In Documents préparatoires à la conférence technique internationale pour la protection de la nature, Août 1949, Etats-Unis, ed. UIPN, 9–14. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  33. Harroy, J.-P. 1950. Introduction. In Conférence technique internationale pour la protection de la nature, Lake Success, 22–29 – VIII – 1949. Procès-verbaux et rapports, ed. UIPN, vi–xi. Paris/Brussels: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  34. Hills, G.A. 1974. A philosophical approach to landscape planning. Landscape and Planning 1: 339–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Holdgate, M.W. 1999. The green web. A union for world conservation. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  36. Hooper, D.U., F.S. Chapin III, J.J. Ewel, A. Hector, P. Inchausti, S. Lavorel, J.H. Lawton, D.M. Lodge, M. Loreau, S. Naeem, B. Schmid, H. Setälä, A.J. Symstad, J. Vandermeer, and D.A. Wardle. 2005. Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem functioning: A consensus of current knowledge. Ecological Monographs 75: 3–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hornaday, W.T. 1889. The extermination of the American bison. In Annual report of the board of regents of the Smithsonian Institution for the year 1887. Part 2, 369–548. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar
  38. Hutchinson, G.E. 1959. Homage to Santa Rosalia or why are there so many kinds of animals? The American Naturalist 93: 145–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hutchinson, G.E. 1964. The lacustrine microcosm reconsidered. American Scientist 52: 334–341.Google Scholar
  40. Huxley, J.S. 1957. New bottles for new wine: Essays. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  41. Larrère, C. 1997. Les philosophies de l’environnement. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  42. Leopold, A. 1949. A Sand County almanac, and sketches here and there. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Lindeman, R.L. 1942. The trophic-dynamic aspect of ecology. Ecology 23: 399–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Macfadyen, A. 1975. Some thoughts on the behaviour of ecologists. Journal of Animal Ecology 44: 351–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mani, G.S. 1984. Genetic diversity and ecological stability. In Evolutionary ecology. 23rd symposium of the British ecological society, ed. B. Shorrocks, 363–396. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
  46. May, R.M. 1984. An overview: Real and apparent patterns in community structure. In Ecological communities. Conceptual issues and the evidence, eds. D.R. Strong Jr., D. Simberloff, L.G. Abele, and A.B. Thistle, 3–16. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  48. Naveh, Z. 2000. The total human ecosystem: Integrating ecology and economics. BioScience 50: 357–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Norton, B.G. 1984. Environmental ethics and weak anthropocentrism. Environmental Ethics 6: 131–148.Google Scholar
  50. Norton, B.G. 1988. Commodity, amenity, and morality. The limits of quantification in valuing biodiversity. In BioDiversity, eds. E.O. Wilson and F.M. Peter, 200–205. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  51. Odum, E.P. 1953. Fundamentals of ecology. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders.Google Scholar
  52. Petit, G. 1950. Protection de la nature et écologie. In Conférence technique internationale pour la protection de la nature, Lake Success, 22–29 – VIII – 1949. Procès-verbaux et rapports, ed. UIPN, 304–314. Paris/Brussels: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  53. Pickett, S.T.A., and P.S. White (eds.). 1985. The ecology of natural disturbance and patch dynamics. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  54. Ricklefs, R.E. 1987. Community diversity: Relative roles of local and regional processes. Science 235: 167–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rolston, H.III. 1988. Environmental ethics? Duties to and values in the natural world. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Rozzi, R. 1999. The reciprocal links between evolutionary-ecological sciences and environmental ethics. BioScience 49: 911–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ruse, M. 1986. Evolutionary ethics: A phoenix arisen. Zygon 21: 95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ruse, M. (ed.). 2009. Introduction. In Thomas Henry Huxley: Evolution & ethics. Edited and with an introduction by M. Ruse, vii–xxxvi. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Shorroks, B. (ed.). 1984. Evolutionary ecology. 23rd symposium of the British ecological society. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
  60. Silver, W.L., S. Brown, and A.E. Lugo. 1996. Effects of changes in biodiversity on ecosystem function in tropical forests. Conservation Biology 10: 17–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Speth, J.G., M.W. Holdgate, and M.K. Tolba. 1992. Foreword. In Global biodiversity strategy: Guidelines for action to save, study and use earth’s biotic wealth sustainably and equitably, eds. WRI, IUCN, and UNEP, v–vi. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.Google Scholar
  62. Tansley, A.G. 1935. The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology 16: 284–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Taylor, P., and Y. Haila. 2001. Situatedness and problematic boundaries: Conceptualizing life’s complex ecological context. Biology and Philosophy 16: 521–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Taylor, P.W. 1986. Respect for nature: A theory of environmental ethics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  65. UIPN. 1948. Union Internationale pour la Protection de la Nature, créée à Fontainebleau le 5 octobre 1948. Brussels: UIPN.Google Scholar
  66. UIPN. 1949. Documents préparatoires à la conférence technique internationale pour la protection de la nature. Août 1949, Etats-Unis. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  67. UIPN. 1950. Conférence technique internationale pour la protection de la nature, Lake Success, 22–29 – VIII – 1949. Procès-verbaux et rapports. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  68. Wiens, J.A. 1984. On Understanding a non-equilibrium world: Myth and reality in community patterns and processes. In Ecological communities. Conceptual issues and the evidence, eds. D.R. Strong Jr., D. Simberloff, L.G. Abele, and A.B. Thistle, 439–457. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Wilson, E.O. 1975. Sociobiology: The new synthesis. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
  70. WRI, IUCN, and UNEP (eds.). 1992. Global biodiversity strategy: Guidelines for action to save, study and use earth’s biotic wealth sustainably and equitably. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.Google Scholar
  71. Wu, J., and O.L. Loucks. 1995. From balance of nature to hierarchical patch dynamics: A paradigm shift in ecology. The Quarterly Review of Biology 70: 439–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department Men-Natures-Societies, Ecoanthropology and EthnobiologyMuséum National d’Histoire NaturelleParisFrance

Personalised recommendations