When Agendas Collide: Human Welfare and Biological Conservation. Chan, K. M. A., Pringle, R. M., Ranganathan, J., Boggs, C. L., Chan, Y. L., Ehrlich, P. R., Haff, P. K., Heller, N. E., Al-Khafaji, K., & Macmynowski, D. P. 21(1):59–68. ![When Agendas Collide: Human Welfare and Biological Conservation [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper doi abstract bibtex Conservation should benefit ecosystems, nonhuman organisms, and current and future human beings. Nevertheless, tension among these goals engenders potential ethical conflicts: conservationists' true motivations may differ from the justifications they offer for their activities, and conservation projects have the potential to disempower and oppress people. We reviewed the promise and deficiencies of integrating social, economic, and biological concerns into conservation, focusing on research in ecosystem services and efforts in community-based conservation. Despite much progress, neither paradigm provides a silver bullet for conservation's most pressing problems, and both require additional thought and modification to become maximally effective. We conclude that the following strategies are needed to make conservation more effective in our human-dominated world. (1) Conservation research needs to integrate with social scholarship in a more sophisticated manner. (2) Conservation must be informed by a detailed understanding of the spatial, temporal, and social distributions of costs and benefits of conservation efforts. Strategies should reflect this understanding, particularly by equitably distributing conservation's costs. (3) We must better acknowledge the social concerns that accompany biodiversity conservation; accordingly, sometimes we must argue for conservation for biodiversity's sake, not for its direct human benefits. Cuando las Agendas Chocan: Bienestar Humano y Conservacion Biologica Resumen: La conservacion deberia beneficiar a los ecosistemas, a los organismos no humanos y a los seres humanos actuales y futuros. Sin embargo, las tensiones entre estas metas engendran potenciales conflictos eticos: las verdaderas motivaciones de los conservacionistas pueden diferir de las justificaciones que ofrecen por sus actividades, y los proyectos de conservacion tienen el potencial de reducir facultades y oprimir a la gente. Revisamos la promision y deficiencias de la integracion de aspectos sociales, economicos y biologicos a la conservacion, de la concentracion de la investigacion en los servicios ecosistemicos y los esfuerzos de la conservacion basada en comunidades. A pesar de muchos progresos, ningun paradigma proporciona una solucion directa a los problemas mas apremiantes de la conservacion, y ambos requieren de reflexiones y modificaciones adicionales para ser afectivos al maximo. Concluimos que se requieren las siguientes estrategias para que la conservacion sea mas efectiva en un mundo dominado por humanos. (1) La investigacion en conservacion necesita integrar aspectos sociales de manera mas sofisticada. (2) La conservacion debe ser informada por el entendimiento detallado de la distribucion espacial, temporal y social de los costos y beneficios de los esfuerzos de conservacion. Las estrategias deben reflejar este entendimiento, particularmente mediante la distribucion equitativa de los costos de conservacion. (3) Debemos mejorar el reconocimiento de las preocupaciones sociales que acompanan a la conservacion de la biodiversidad; consecuentemente, algunas veces debemos argumentar por la conservacion en favor de la biodiversidad, no por sus beneficios directos para los humanos.
@article{chanWhenAgendasCollide2007,
title = {When Agendas Collide: Human Welfare and Biological Conservation},
author = {Chan, K. M. A. and Pringle, R. M. and Ranganathan, J. and Boggs, C. L. and Chan, Y. L. and Ehrlich, P. R. and Haff, P. K. and Heller, N. E. and Al-Khafaji, K. and Macmynowski, D. P.},
date = {2007-02},
journaltitle = {Conservation Biology},
volume = {21},
pages = {59--68},
issn = {0888-8892},
doi = {10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00570.x},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00570.x},
abstract = {Conservation should benefit ecosystems, nonhuman organisms, and current and future human beings. Nevertheless, tension among these goals engenders potential ethical conflicts: conservationists' true motivations may differ from the justifications they offer for their activities, and conservation projects have the potential to disempower and oppress people. We reviewed the promise and deficiencies of integrating social, economic, and biological concerns into conservation, focusing on research in ecosystem services and efforts in community-based conservation. Despite much progress, neither paradigm provides a silver bullet for conservation's most pressing problems, and both require additional thought and modification to become maximally effective. We conclude that the following strategies are needed to make conservation more effective in our human-dominated world. (1) Conservation research needs to integrate with social scholarship in a more sophisticated manner. (2) Conservation must be informed by a detailed understanding of the spatial, temporal, and social distributions of costs and benefits of conservation efforts. Strategies should reflect this understanding, particularly by equitably distributing conservation's costs. (3) We must better acknowledge the social concerns that accompany biodiversity conservation; accordingly, sometimes we must argue for conservation for biodiversity's sake, not for its direct human benefits. Cuando las Agendas Chocan: Bienestar Humano y Conservacion Biologica Resumen: La conservacion deberia beneficiar a los ecosistemas, a los organismos no humanos y a los seres humanos actuales y futuros. Sin embargo, las tensiones entre estas metas engendran potenciales conflictos eticos: las verdaderas motivaciones de los conservacionistas pueden diferir de las justificaciones que ofrecen por sus actividades, y los proyectos de conservacion tienen el potencial de reducir facultades y oprimir a la gente. Revisamos la promision y deficiencias de la integracion de aspectos sociales, economicos y biologicos a la conservacion, de la concentracion de la investigacion en los servicios ecosistemicos y los esfuerzos de la conservacion basada en comunidades. A pesar de muchos progresos, ningun paradigma proporciona una solucion directa a los problemas mas apremiantes de la conservacion, y ambos requieren de reflexiones y modificaciones adicionales para ser afectivos al maximo. Concluimos que se requieren las siguientes estrategias para que la conservacion sea mas efectiva en un mundo dominado por humanos. (1) La investigacion en conservacion necesita integrar aspectos sociales de manera mas sofisticada. (2) La conservacion debe ser informada por el entendimiento detallado de la distribucion espacial, temporal y social de los costos y beneficios de los esfuerzos de conservacion. Las estrategias deben reflejar este entendimiento, particularmente mediante la distribucion equitativa de los costos de conservacion. (3) Debemos mejorar el reconocimiento de las preocupaciones sociales que acompanan a la conservacion de la biodiversidad; consecuentemente, algunas veces debemos argumentar por la conservacion en favor de la biodiversidad, no por sus beneficios directos para los humanos.},
keywords = {*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM,~INRMM-MiD:c-1019744,biodiversity,conflicts,conservation,ecosystem,ecosystem-services,science-ethics,science-policy-interface,silver-bullet,trade-offs},
number = {1}
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"x84sTQtD9uhKAfH44","bibbaseid":"chan-pringle-ranganathan-boggs-chan-ehrlich-haff-heller-etal-whenagendascollidehumanwelfareandbiologicalconservation","authorIDs":[],"author_short":["Chan, K. M. A.","Pringle, R. M.","Ranganathan, J.","Boggs, C. L.","Chan, Y. L.","Ehrlich, P. R.","Haff, P. K.","Heller, N. E.","Al-Khafaji, K.","Macmynowski, D. P."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"When Agendas Collide: Human Welfare and Biological Conservation","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Chan"],"firstnames":["K.","M.","A."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Pringle"],"firstnames":["R.","M."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Ranganathan"],"firstnames":["J."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Boggs"],"firstnames":["C.","L."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Chan"],"firstnames":["Y.","L."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Ehrlich"],"firstnames":["P.","R."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Haff"],"firstnames":["P.","K."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Heller"],"firstnames":["N.","E."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Al-Khafaji"],"firstnames":["K."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Macmynowski"],"firstnames":["D.","P."],"suffixes":[]}],"date":"2007-02","journaltitle":"Conservation Biology","volume":"21","pages":"59–68","issn":"0888-8892","doi":"10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00570.x","url":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00570.x","abstract":"Conservation should benefit ecosystems, nonhuman organisms, and current and future human beings. Nevertheless, tension among these goals engenders potential ethical conflicts: conservationists' true motivations may differ from the justifications they offer for their activities, and conservation projects have the potential to disempower and oppress people. We reviewed the promise and deficiencies of integrating social, economic, and biological concerns into conservation, focusing on research in ecosystem services and efforts in community-based conservation. Despite much progress, neither paradigm provides a silver bullet for conservation's most pressing problems, and both require additional thought and modification to become maximally effective. We conclude that the following strategies are needed to make conservation more effective in our human-dominated world. (1) Conservation research needs to integrate with social scholarship in a more sophisticated manner. (2) Conservation must be informed by a detailed understanding of the spatial, temporal, and social distributions of costs and benefits of conservation efforts. Strategies should reflect this understanding, particularly by equitably distributing conservation's costs. (3) We must better acknowledge the social concerns that accompany biodiversity conservation; accordingly, sometimes we must argue for conservation for biodiversity's sake, not for its direct human benefits. Cuando las Agendas Chocan: Bienestar Humano y Conservacion Biologica Resumen: La conservacion deberia beneficiar a los ecosistemas, a los organismos no humanos y a los seres humanos actuales y futuros. Sin embargo, las tensiones entre estas metas engendran potenciales conflictos eticos: las verdaderas motivaciones de los conservacionistas pueden diferir de las justificaciones que ofrecen por sus actividades, y los proyectos de conservacion tienen el potencial de reducir facultades y oprimir a la gente. Revisamos la promision y deficiencias de la integracion de aspectos sociales, economicos y biologicos a la conservacion, de la concentracion de la investigacion en los servicios ecosistemicos y los esfuerzos de la conservacion basada en comunidades. A pesar de muchos progresos, ningun paradigma proporciona una solucion directa a los problemas mas apremiantes de la conservacion, y ambos requieren de reflexiones y modificaciones adicionales para ser afectivos al maximo. Concluimos que se requieren las siguientes estrategias para que la conservacion sea mas efectiva en un mundo dominado por humanos. (1) La investigacion en conservacion necesita integrar aspectos sociales de manera mas sofisticada. (2) La conservacion debe ser informada por el entendimiento detallado de la distribucion espacial, temporal y social de los costos y beneficios de los esfuerzos de conservacion. Las estrategias deben reflejar este entendimiento, particularmente mediante la distribucion equitativa de los costos de conservacion. (3) Debemos mejorar el reconocimiento de las preocupaciones sociales que acompanan a la conservacion de la biodiversidad; consecuentemente, algunas veces debemos argumentar por la conservacion en favor de la biodiversidad, no por sus beneficios directos para los humanos.","keywords":"*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM,~INRMM-MiD:c-1019744,biodiversity,conflicts,conservation,ecosystem,ecosystem-services,science-ethics,science-policy-interface,silver-bullet,trade-offs","number":"1","bibtex":"@article{chanWhenAgendasCollide2007,\n title = {When Agendas Collide: Human Welfare and Biological Conservation},\n author = {Chan, K. M. A. and Pringle, R. M. and Ranganathan, J. and Boggs, C. L. and Chan, Y. L. and Ehrlich, P. R. and Haff, P. K. and Heller, N. E. and Al-Khafaji, K. and Macmynowski, D. P.},\n date = {2007-02},\n journaltitle = {Conservation Biology},\n volume = {21},\n pages = {59--68},\n issn = {0888-8892},\n doi = {10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00570.x},\n url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00570.x},\n abstract = {Conservation should benefit ecosystems, nonhuman organisms, and current and future human beings. Nevertheless, tension among these goals engenders potential ethical conflicts: conservationists' true motivations may differ from the justifications they offer for their activities, and conservation projects have the potential to disempower and oppress people. We reviewed the promise and deficiencies of integrating social, economic, and biological concerns into conservation, focusing on research in ecosystem services and efforts in community-based conservation. Despite much progress, neither paradigm provides a silver bullet for conservation's most pressing problems, and both require additional thought and modification to become maximally effective. We conclude that the following strategies are needed to make conservation more effective in our human-dominated world. (1) Conservation research needs to integrate with social scholarship in a more sophisticated manner. (2) Conservation must be informed by a detailed understanding of the spatial, temporal, and social distributions of costs and benefits of conservation efforts. Strategies should reflect this understanding, particularly by equitably distributing conservation's costs. (3) We must better acknowledge the social concerns that accompany biodiversity conservation; accordingly, sometimes we must argue for conservation for biodiversity's sake, not for its direct human benefits. Cuando las Agendas Chocan: Bienestar Humano y Conservacion Biologica Resumen: La conservacion deberia beneficiar a los ecosistemas, a los organismos no humanos y a los seres humanos actuales y futuros. Sin embargo, las tensiones entre estas metas engendran potenciales conflictos eticos: las verdaderas motivaciones de los conservacionistas pueden diferir de las justificaciones que ofrecen por sus actividades, y los proyectos de conservacion tienen el potencial de reducir facultades y oprimir a la gente. Revisamos la promision y deficiencias de la integracion de aspectos sociales, economicos y biologicos a la conservacion, de la concentracion de la investigacion en los servicios ecosistemicos y los esfuerzos de la conservacion basada en comunidades. A pesar de muchos progresos, ningun paradigma proporciona una solucion directa a los problemas mas apremiantes de la conservacion, y ambos requieren de reflexiones y modificaciones adicionales para ser afectivos al maximo. Concluimos que se requieren las siguientes estrategias para que la conservacion sea mas efectiva en un mundo dominado por humanos. (1) La investigacion en conservacion necesita integrar aspectos sociales de manera mas sofisticada. (2) La conservacion debe ser informada por el entendimiento detallado de la distribucion espacial, temporal y social de los costos y beneficios de los esfuerzos de conservacion. Las estrategias deben reflejar este entendimiento, particularmente mediante la distribucion equitativa de los costos de conservacion. (3) Debemos mejorar el reconocimiento de las preocupaciones sociales que acompanan a la conservacion de la biodiversidad; consecuentemente, algunas veces debemos argumentar por la conservacion en favor de la biodiversidad, no por sus beneficios directos para los humanos.},\n keywords = {*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM,~INRMM-MiD:c-1019744,biodiversity,conflicts,conservation,ecosystem,ecosystem-services,science-ethics,science-policy-interface,silver-bullet,trade-offs},\n number = {1}\n}\n\n","author_short":["Chan, K. M. A.","Pringle, R. M.","Ranganathan, J.","Boggs, C. L.","Chan, Y. L.","Ehrlich, P. R.","Haff, P. K.","Heller, N. E.","Al-Khafaji, K.","Macmynowski, D. P."],"key":"chanWhenAgendasCollide2007","id":"chanWhenAgendasCollide2007","bibbaseid":"chan-pringle-ranganathan-boggs-chan-ehrlich-haff-heller-etal-whenagendascollidehumanwelfareandbiologicalconservation","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00570.x"},"keyword":["*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM","~INRMM-MiD:c-1019744","biodiversity","conflicts","conservation","ecosystem","ecosystem-services","science-ethics","science-policy-interface","silver-bullet","trade-offs"],"downloads":0},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://tmpfiles.org/dl/58794/INRMM.bib","creationDate":"2020-07-02T22:41:04.048Z","downloads":0,"keywords":["*imported-from-citeulike-inrmm","~inrmm-mid:c-1019744","biodiversity","conflicts","conservation","ecosystem","ecosystem-services","science-ethics","science-policy-interface","silver-bullet","trade-offs"],"search_terms":["agendas","collide","human","welfare","biological","conservation","chan","pringle","ranganathan","boggs","chan","ehrlich","haff","heller","al-khafaji","macmynowski"],"title":"When Agendas Collide: Human Welfare and Biological Conservation","year":null,"dataSources":["DXuKbcZTirdigFKPF"]}