generalized arguments and recommendations. This is because in this framework, all
the threads within this widely spun web have to be taken equally into consideration.
The most far-reaching kind of consideration in radical physiocentric or holistic
environmental ethics implies that everyone is thoughtful of everything. In this sense,
even valuing living processes higher than abiotic ones would be reductionist, as
abiotic and biotic processes interact with one another.
Consequently, in this book, while acknowledging the many connections and
interdependencies among biodiversity, human beings, and human cultures, we
analyze these components separately.
This is the only way to obtain a focused and unbiased view of specific individual
environmental issues. Indeed, such a procedure is particularly called for when
judging the impacts of human activity on nature because it would otherwise be
impossible to make selective use of the specific indicators. An important principle in
this process is the law of series and continuity. Predictions are often all the more
realistic the more precisely they are able to track past trends and to project them into
the future. Periods of drought and ensuing crop failures are more frequent in specific
semi-arid regions of the world; in the oceanic and cool temperate regions, rainy
summers can cause crop failures as well. Deserts and alpine regions are not affected
because crops are not cultivated there; nor, for example, are many regions of the wet
tropics. All the oceans of the world are affected by rising sea levels. Nevertheless,
some coasts and islands are not affected at all—for geological reasons, as movements of the Earth’s crust and sedimentation rates can overcompensate the rise in sea
level. This global phenomenon, then, only becomes a true problem in certain parts of
the world.
This can, however, mean that the social sciences, the natural sciences, and the
media arrive at very different evaluations of the significance for humans and nature
of certain environmental problems.
There is now a gratifying variety of writings on the history of the environment
and the current anthropogenic impacts on the environment. Indicator systems have
also been developed which take into account the risks and the well-being of people,
qualitative and quantitative changes in ecosystems, the conservation of biodiversity,
and the greater risk of extinction facing some animal and plant species. This all
provides a sound basis for linking these various levels with one another.
This book broaches the issue of perspectives and prognoses for the impacts of
anthropogenic activity on ecosystems and species conservation. Its goal is to
improve assessments of the impacts of human activity on the environment.
More specifically, we investigate the following kinds of questions:
How can biodiversity and ecosystems be more effectively protected?
How can we ensure that planning and organization of nature protection measures are
no longer regarded as backward-looking and conservative but as a cultural
achievement and a progressive undertaking?
How can the greatest possible effect be achieved in the management of biodiversity
but at the same time expenditure be kept low?
vi
Preface
the threads within this widely spun web have to be taken equally into consideration.
The most far-reaching kind of consideration in radical physiocentric or holistic
environmental ethics implies that everyone is thoughtful of everything. In this sense,
even valuing living processes higher than abiotic ones would be reductionist, as
abiotic and biotic processes interact with one another.
Consequently, in this book, while acknowledging the many connections and
interdependencies among biodiversity, human beings, and human cultures, we
analyze these components separately.
This is the only way to obtain a focused and unbiased view of specific individual
environmental issues. Indeed, such a procedure is particularly called for when
judging the impacts of human activity on nature because it would otherwise be
impossible to make selective use of the specific indicators. An important principle in
this process is the law of series and continuity. Predictions are often all the more
realistic the more precisely they are able to track past trends and to project them into
the future. Periods of drought and ensuing crop failures are more frequent in specific
semi-arid regions of the world; in the oceanic and cool temperate regions, rainy
summers can cause crop failures as well. Deserts and alpine regions are not affected
because crops are not cultivated there; nor, for example, are many regions of the wet
tropics. All the oceans of the world are affected by rising sea levels. Nevertheless,
some coasts and islands are not affected at all—for geological reasons, as movements of the Earth’s crust and sedimentation rates can overcompensate the rise in sea
level. This global phenomenon, then, only becomes a true problem in certain parts of
the world.
This can, however, mean that the social sciences, the natural sciences, and the
media arrive at very different evaluations of the significance for humans and nature
of certain environmental problems.
There is now a gratifying variety of writings on the history of the environment
and the current anthropogenic impacts on the environment. Indicator systems have
also been developed which take into account the risks and the well-being of people,
qualitative and quantitative changes in ecosystems, the conservation of biodiversity,
and the greater risk of extinction facing some animal and plant species. This all
provides a sound basis for linking these various levels with one another.
This book broaches the issue of perspectives and prognoses for the impacts of
anthropogenic activity on ecosystems and species conservation. Its goal is to
improve assessments of the impacts of human activity on the environment.
More specifically, we investigate the following kinds of questions:
How can biodiversity and ecosystems be more effectively protected?
How can we ensure that planning and organization of nature protection measures are
no longer regarded as backward-looking and conservative but as a cultural
achievement and a progressive undertaking?
How can the greatest possible effect be achieved in the management of biodiversity
but at the same time expenditure be kept low?
vi
Preface