David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (6):457-477 (2004)
Conservation scientists are arguing whether naturalness provides a reasonable imperative for conservation. To clarify this debate and the interpretation of the term natural, I analyze three management strategies – ecosystem preservation, ecosystem restoration, and ecosystem engineering – with respect to the naturalness of their outcomes. This analysis consists in two parts. First, the ambiguous term natural is defined in a variety of ways, including (1) naturalness as that which is part of nature, (2) naturalness as a contrast to artifactuality, (3) naturalness as an historical independence from human actions, and (4) naturalness as possession of certain properties. After that, I analyze the different conceptions with respect to their implications for the three management strategies. The main conclusion is that there exists no single conception of naturalness that could distinguish between the outcomes of the three management methods. Therefore, as long as the outcomes of the different methods are regarded as being of a different value in conservation, we should either abandon the idea of naturalness as the guiding concept in conservation or use the term natural only in the ways that take both its historical and feature dependent meanings into consideration.
|Keywords||conservation ecosystem engineering naturalness preservation restoration unnaturalness|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Ulrich Heink, Robert Bartz & Ingo Kowarik (2012). How Useful Are the Concepts of Familiarity, Biological Integrity, and Ecosystem Health for Evaluating Damages by GM Crops? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (1):3-17.
Similar books and articles
Mohan Matthen (1984). Ostension, Names and Natural Kind Terms. Dialogue 23 (01):44-58.
Henk Verhoog, Mirjam Matze, Edith Lammerts van Bueren & Ton Baars (2003). The Role of the Concept of the Natural (Naturalness) in Organic Farming. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 16 (1):29-49.
Theodore Sider (1995). Sparseness, Immanence, and Naturalness. Noûs 29 (3):360-377.
Douglas Edwards (2013). Naturalness, Representation and the Metaphysics of Truth. European Journal of Philosophy 21 (3):384-401.
P. F. Haperen, B. Gremmen & J. Jacobs (2012). Reconstruction of the Ethical Debate on Naturalness in Discussions About Plant-Biotechnology. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (6):797-812.
Theodore Sider (1993). Naturalness, Intrinsicality, and Duplication. Dissertation, University of Massachusetts
Helena Siipi (2007). Naturalness in Biodiversity Management. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 3:173-178.
Ben Ridder (2007). An Exploration of the Value of Naturalness and Wild Nature. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 20 (2):195-213.
Helena Siipi (2008). Dimensions of Naturalness. Ethics and the Environment 13 (1):pp. 71-103.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads23 ( #79,956 of 1,102,037 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #68,255 of 1,102,037 )
How can I increase my downloads?