Kurt Jax

Current workflows in academic ecology rarely allow an engagement of ecologists with philosophers, or with contemporary philosophical work. We argue that this is a missed opportunity for enriching ecological reasoning and practice, because many questions in ecology overlap with philosophical questions and with current topics in contemporary philosophy of science. One obstacle to a closer connection and collaboration between the fields is the limited awareness of scientists, including ecologists, of current philosophical questions, developments and ideas. In this article, we aim to overcome this obstacle and trigger more collaborations between ecologists and philosophers. First, we provide an overview of philosophical research relevant to ecologists. Second, we use examples to demonstrate that many ecological questions have a philosophical dimension and point to related philosophical work. We elaborate on one example – the debate around the appropriate level of complexity of ecological models – to show in more detail how philosophy can enrich ecology. Finally, we provide suggestions for how to initiate collaborative projects involving both ecologists and philosophers.

This book provides a review of the multitude of conservation concepts, both from a scientific, philosophical, and social science perspective, asking how we want to shape our relationships with nature as humans, and providing guidance on which conservation approaches can help us to do this. Nature conservation is a contested terrain and there is not only one idea about what constitutes conservation but many different ones, which sometimes are conflicting. Employing a conceptual and historical analysis, this book sorts and interprets the differing conservation concepts, with a special emphasis on narrative analysis as a means for describing human–nature relationships and for linking conservation science to practice and to society at large. Case studies illustrate the philosophical issues and help to analyse major controversies in conservation biology. While the main focus is on Western ideas of conservation, the book also touches upon non-Western, including indigenous, concepts. The approach taken in this book emphasises the often implicit strategic and societal dimensions of conservation concepts, including power relations. In finding a path through the multitude of concepts, the book showcases that it is necessary to maintain the plurality of approaches, in order to successfully address different situations and societal choices. Overall, this book highlights the very tension which conservation biology must withstand between science and society: between what is possible and what we want individually or as a society or even more what is desirable. Bringing some order into this multitude will support more efficient conservation and conservation biology. This book will be of great interest to students and scholars studying nature conservation from a variety of disciplines, including biology, ecology, anthropology, sociology, geography, and philosophy. It will also be of use to professionals wanting to gain an understanding of the broad spectrum of conservation concepts and approaches and when to apply them.

The chapter provides a brief general introduction into the rationale of the book and a short overview on its structure. The specific problems which the book deals with are described. The point of departure is that nature conservation is contested terrain in many respects, between different parts of society with different interests, between different conservation practitioners about the right means to protect nature, but also with respect to what nature conservation is (or should be) and thus with respect to its very foundations. Ideas of what constitutes conservation are sometimes conflicting. Clarifying the meaning of the various conservation concepts and the human–nature relationships implicit in them concepts is intended to support conservation and to arrive at good human–nature relationships. Each of the following book chapters is briefly described.

The chapter describes some philosophical and anthropological background of conservation concepts. Starting with a discussion on “nature” and “natural” in Western thinking, it describes the different meanings of “nature” in Western culture and its potential consequences for conservation. In an extended case study it is explored what it could mean to speak of nature as “socially constructed” and why this is only rarely something that has a negative impact on conservation. While the book is focused mainly on Western ideas of nature conservation, it is necessary to also consider non-Western ideas of nature and conservation because Western ideas are often taken for granted and as universal to all humans. Some brief examples from non-Western cultures demonstrate that and why this is an erroneous assumption. The difficulties to “translate” or harmonise between Western and non-Western ideas of nature and conservation are taken up again by means of another case study, analysing the debate about the Conceptual Framework for the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Finally it is briefly elaborated if or to what degree a narrative approach to conservation concepts may also be a tool to “translate” between Western and non-Western ideas of nature and nature conservation.

This chapter is trying to lay the ground for selecting appropriate concepts for conservation. It at first pleads for restraint in proliferating too many new concepts, arguing that many of them are just revivals or reshaping of existing ideas. At the same time, the use of multiple major conservation concepts is argued for, depending on the specific biophysical and social circumstances. Extending the view, and as a necessary background for applying any conservation concept, the social and economic background of conservation has to be accounted for, as is explained in some detail. Building on and integrating the results from all previous chapters of the book, a set of criteria and requirements is presented that should guide the selection of appropriate conservation concepts, based on the assumption that conservation aims at (re)constructing good human–nature relationships. Finally, the criteria are condensed into a brief proposal for a process allowing to clarify conservation goals and tackling conservation conflicts.

In this chapter, some basic background of conservation and conservation concepts is presented. Important definitions, distinctions, and basic assumptions, which underly the book, are discussed. Issues dealt with are what are conservation and conservation biology and delimiting it from and setting it in relation to other fields, such as environmental science, sustainability science, and political ecology. To situate conservation and conservation biology historically, a short sketch of the history of conservation is presented. The relations between conservation (as a practice), conservation biology (as a science), and society at large are briefly discussed. A case study about the debate on the “new conservation” illustrates the complex relations between science, society, and conservation (concepts).

This chapter constitutes the analytical core of the book. At first different ways by which one may distinguish (and classify) conservation concepts are introduced, e.g. via their target objects and the values embraced. As a tool to integrate different criteria, the chapter then focuses on a narrative analysis of human–nature relationships as implicit in conservation concepts, using methods from literary studies, history, and other fields within the humanities. To reconstruct such implicit narratives, a general structure of human–nature relationships in a conservation context is developed. Building on this scheme, seven major narratives are described that can be found in conservation concepts. Following this, a larger number of related conservation concepts are arranged into conceptual clusters (e.g. biodiversity, ecosystem services, cultural landscapes), at first sight partly linked to the narratives described before. For each of these clusters there is a brief discussion of its history, the commonalities as well as what distinguishes the concepts within a cluster, in terms of the objects, values, and narratives they refer to. At the end of the chapter, a comparison between the concepts is presented, inter alia with a set of tables.

This chapter provides a brief summary of the most important results of this book, and, based on this, provides some ideas for further directions in conservation and conservation biology, not the least regarding the visions for the future. The complexity and diversity of conservation concept is emphasised and the need to use multiple conservation concepts, adapted to specific natural and social settings. The use of narratives of human–nature relationships is seen as a potentially productive way to clarify the different approaches to nature conservation within the community of conservationists. As part of the author’s personal vision for the future of conservation, the notion of respect is stressed, both towards non-human nature and to other humans. Positive visions of future human–nature relationships should be developed, not the least on local and regional scales.

The sustainable development goals (SDGs) constitute an ambitious comprehensive global framework including monitoring mechanisms and indicators to evaluate progress towards precise targets of sustainable development. Most European countries have adapted their national sustainability indicator systems to conform to the UN Agenda 2030 for sustainable development, introducing new indicators and monitoring frameworks and governance processes in which these are embedded. What do we know about the political processes and struggles of implementing this important global framework? How does the politics of indicators differ in national contexts? We propose a classification of national indicator systems along dimensions of indicator selection, appraisal landscape, participatory nature, and political communication. We empirically explore these dimensions for four European national sustainability indicator systems through a comparative analysis based on national policy documents, indicator databases, and web portals as well as inputs from workshops and expert interviews. Given the considerable variation with respect to the trajectory of national sustainability indicator systems, we posit that these differences correspond to different national interpretations of sustainability.

The United Nations 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) define a path towards a sustainable future, but given that uncertainty characterises the outcomes of any SDG-related actions, risks in the implementation of the Agenda need to be addressed. At the same time, most risk assessments are narrowed to sectoral approaches and do not refer to SDGs. Here, on the basis of a literature review and workshops, it is analysed how SDGs and risks relate to each other’s in different communities. Then, it is formally demonstrated that, as soon as the mathematical definition of risks is broadened to embrace a more systemic perspective, acting to maintain socio-environmental systems within their sustainability domain can be done by risk minimisation. This makes Sustainable Development Goals and risks “the Yin and the Yang of the paths towards sustainability”. Eventually, the usefulness of the SDG-risk nexus for both sustainability and risk management is emphasized.