The new conservation debate

The view from practical ethics

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

114 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In this paper we provide an analysis of the "new conservation debate," a still-evolving dispute in which conservation scientists and advocates defending a strong protected-areas approach (" nature protectionists" ) have become pitted against more development-oriented conservationists (" social conservationists" ) intent on reforming the dominant protected areas model to embrace sustainable use and poverty alleviation efforts. We focus in particular on identifying and clarifying the divergent normative and descriptive claims made by the two camps in the debate, an activity that we suggest will improve communication and understanding among conservationists. We suggest that more explicit discussion of the value and ethical dimensions of this debate is needed, and describe efforts to reduce value conflict and harmonize ethical positions. We conclude with a discussion of emerging planning and policy models that may facilitate a convergence of values in the new conservation debate on a common policy of eco-social sustainability.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)948-957
Number of pages10
JournalBiological Conservation
Volume144
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2011

Fingerprint

ethics
conservation areas
social sustainability
protected area
communication (human)
poverty
poverty alleviation
planning
sustainability
communication
policy

Keywords

  • Ecological ethics
  • Nature protectionists
  • Protected areas
  • Social conservationists
  • Sustainable use

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation

Cite this

The new conservation debate : The view from practical ethics. / Miller, Thaddeus; Minteer, Ben; Malan, Leon C.

In: Biological Conservation, Vol. 144, No. 3, 2011, p. 948-957.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{90b3d76c4b444fac9f44009c30b65d92,
title = "The new conservation debate: The view from practical ethics",
abstract = "In this paper we provide an analysis of the {"}new conservation debate,{"} a still-evolving dispute in which conservation scientists and advocates defending a strong protected-areas approach ({"} nature protectionists{"} ) have become pitted against more development-oriented conservationists ({"} social conservationists{"} ) intent on reforming the dominant protected areas model to embrace sustainable use and poverty alleviation efforts. We focus in particular on identifying and clarifying the divergent normative and descriptive claims made by the two camps in the debate, an activity that we suggest will improve communication and understanding among conservationists. We suggest that more explicit discussion of the value and ethical dimensions of this debate is needed, and describe efforts to reduce value conflict and harmonize ethical positions. We conclude with a discussion of emerging planning and policy models that may facilitate a convergence of values in the new conservation debate on a common policy of eco-social sustainability.",
keywords = "Ecological ethics, Nature protectionists, Protected areas, Social conservationists, Sustainable use",
author = "Thaddeus Miller and Ben Minteer and Malan, {Leon C.}",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1016/j.biocon.2010.04.001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "144",
pages = "948--957",
journal = "Biological Conservation",
issn = "0006-3207",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The new conservation debate

T2 - The view from practical ethics

AU - Miller, Thaddeus

AU - Minteer, Ben

AU - Malan, Leon C.

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - In this paper we provide an analysis of the "new conservation debate," a still-evolving dispute in which conservation scientists and advocates defending a strong protected-areas approach (" nature protectionists" ) have become pitted against more development-oriented conservationists (" social conservationists" ) intent on reforming the dominant protected areas model to embrace sustainable use and poverty alleviation efforts. We focus in particular on identifying and clarifying the divergent normative and descriptive claims made by the two camps in the debate, an activity that we suggest will improve communication and understanding among conservationists. We suggest that more explicit discussion of the value and ethical dimensions of this debate is needed, and describe efforts to reduce value conflict and harmonize ethical positions. We conclude with a discussion of emerging planning and policy models that may facilitate a convergence of values in the new conservation debate on a common policy of eco-social sustainability.

AB - In this paper we provide an analysis of the "new conservation debate," a still-evolving dispute in which conservation scientists and advocates defending a strong protected-areas approach (" nature protectionists" ) have become pitted against more development-oriented conservationists (" social conservationists" ) intent on reforming the dominant protected areas model to embrace sustainable use and poverty alleviation efforts. We focus in particular on identifying and clarifying the divergent normative and descriptive claims made by the two camps in the debate, an activity that we suggest will improve communication and understanding among conservationists. We suggest that more explicit discussion of the value and ethical dimensions of this debate is needed, and describe efforts to reduce value conflict and harmonize ethical positions. We conclude with a discussion of emerging planning and policy models that may facilitate a convergence of values in the new conservation debate on a common policy of eco-social sustainability.

KW - Ecological ethics

KW - Nature protectionists

KW - Protected areas

KW - Social conservationists

KW - Sustainable use

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79951814059&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79951814059&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.04.001

DO - 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.04.001

M3 - Article

VL - 144

SP - 948

EP - 957

JO - Biological Conservation

JF - Biological Conservation

SN - 0006-3207

IS - 3

ER -