Do non-native species threaten the natural environment?

Conservation biologists and other environmentalists confront five obstacles in building support for regulatory policies that seek to exclude or remove introduced plants and other non-native species that threaten to harm natural areas or the natural environment. First, the concept of “harm to the natural environment” is nebulous and undefined. Second, ecologists cannot predict how introduced species will behave in natural ecosystems. If biologists cannot define “harm” or predict the behavior of introduced species, they must target all non-native species as potentially “harmful”. an impossibly large regulatory task. Third, loss of species richness may constitute harm to an environment, but introduced organisms typically, generally, and significantly add to species richness in ecosystems. If species richness correlates with desirable ecosystem properties, moreover, such as stability and productivity, as some ecologists believe, then introduced organisms, by increasing species richness, would support those desirable properties. Fourth, one may plausibly argue that extinction constitutes environmental harm, but there is no evidence that non-native species, especially plants, are significant causes of extinction, except for predators in certain lakes and other small island-like environments. Fifth, while aesthetic, ethical, and spiritual values may provide a legitimate basis for invasive species policy, biologists often cite concepts such as “biodiversity” and ecosystem “health” or “integrity” to provide a scientific justification. To assert that non-native species threaten biodiversity or undermine ecosystem health, however, may be to draw conceptual entailments or consequences from definitions of “biodiversity” and “integrity” that arbitrarily exclude non-native species or make the presence of exotic species a per se indicator of decline
Keywords Biodiversity  ecosystems  invasive species  plant breeding
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10806-005-1500-y
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 30,169
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Non-Native Species DO Threaten the Natural Environment!Daniel Simberloff - 2005 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (6):595-607.
Invasive Species and the Loss of Beta Diversity.Sarah Wright - 2011 - Ethics and the Environment 16 (1):75-98.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Biological Species as Natural Kinds.David B. Kitts & David J. Kitts - 1979 - Philosophy of Science 46 (4):613-622.
Are Biological Species Real?Hugh Lehman - 1967 - Philosophy of Science 34 (2):157-167.
Species Pluralism Does Not Imply Species Eliminativism.Ingo Brigandt - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1305–1316.
The Cladistic Solution to the Species Problem.Mark Ridley - 1989 - Biology and Philosophy 4 (1):1-16.
EU DAISIE Research Project: Wanted—Death Penalty to Keep Native Species Competitive? [REVIEW]M. Zisenis - 2012 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (4):597-606.
Non-Native Species DO Threaten the Natural Environment!Daniel Simberloff - 2005 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (6):595-607.
Added to PP index

Total downloads
109 ( #47,007 of 2,192,005 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #95,373 of 2,192,005 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature