The principle of complementarity in the design of reserve networks to conserve biodiversity: a preliminary history
| Abstract | Explicit, quantitative procedures for identifying biodiversity priority areas are replacing the often ad hoc procedures used in the past to design networks of reserves to conserve biodiversity. This change facilitates more informed choices by policy makers, and thereby makes possible greater satisfaction of conservation goals with increased efficiency. A key feature of these procedures is the use of the principle of complementarity, which ensures that areas chosen for inclusion in a reserve network complement those already selected. This paper sketches the historical development of the principle of complementarity and its applications in practical policy decisions. In the first section a brief account is given of the circumstances out of which concerns for more explicit systematic methods for the assessment of the conservation value of different areas arose. The second section details the emergence of the principle of complementarity in four independent contexts. The third section consists of case studies of the use of the principle of complementarity to make practical policy decisions in Australasia, Africa, and America. In the last section, an assessment is made of the extent to which the principle of complementarity transformed the practice of conservation biology by introducing new standards of rigor and explicitness. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,865 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesK. Sundaram (1972). Kant or Cassirer: A Study in Complementarity. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 3 (1):40-48.
Sahotra Sarkar (2006). Ecological Diversity and Biodiversity as Concepts for Conservation Planning: Comments on Ricotta. Acta Biotheoretica 54 (2).
Stefan Linquist (2008). But is It Progress? On the Alleged Advances of Conservation Biology Over Ecology. Biology and Philosophy 23 (4):529-544.
Andrea Bonaccorsi (2010). New Forms of Complementarity in Science. Minerva 48 (4):355-387.
Sahotra Sarkar (2002). Defining “Biodiversity”; Assessing Biodiversity. The Monist 85 (1):131-155.
Anya Plutynski (2007). A Philosopher Goes Wild. [REVIEW] Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 38 (1):289-296.
Javier Laborde (2008). The Landscape Approach. Environmental Ethics 30 (3):251-262.
Danuta Sobczyńska (1996). Idea komplementarności ekspertymentów. Filozofia Nauki 2.
Sahotra Sarkar (2005). Biodiversity and Environmental Philosophy: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press.
James Maclaurin & Kim Sterelny (2008). What is Biodiversity? University of Chicago Press.
Göran Hermerén (forthcoming). The Principle of Proportionality Revisited: Interpretations and Applications. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy.
Hans Halvorson (2004). Complementarity of Representations in Quantum Mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 35 (1):45-56.
Adolf Meyer-Abich (1955). The Principle of Complementarity in Biology. Acta Biotheoretica 11 (2).
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-12-22Total downloads12 ( #94,544 of 556,808 )Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #39,010 of 556,808 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
