20
P. Tett
Ecosystem-based management is currently a highly topical issue and is being widely
discussed in the context of fisheries management. Introduction of the new Common
Fisheries Policy (CFP) in January 2003 focused on this approach as the way forward to a
sustainable fishing industry. Marine fisheries are one of the remaining examples of human
endeavour involving the direct exploitation of wild animal populations. Fisheries are dependent
on the productivity of the ecosystem, and fisheries have an effect on, and are affected by,
the supporting ecosystem of the target species. It, therefore, follows that prudent and
responsible fisheries management should take account of the profound interactions
between fisheries and their supporting ecosystem.
[However,] ecosystem-based management is not about managing or manipulating ecosystem processes, something that is clearly beyond our abilities. Rather, ecosystem-based
management is concerned with ensuring that fishery management decisions do not
adversely affect the ecosystem function and productivity, so that harvesting of target stocks
(and resultant economic benefits) is sustainable in the long-term. Traditional systems of
management, which have tended to focus on individual stocks or species, have not achieved
this objective and consequently the economic activity that the ecosystem supports has
become compromised.
To my mind, this account falls short in several ways. First, it tends to suggest that the
purpose of ecosystems is merely to produce food, or other services, for humans: it may
be prudent to take account of the dynamic interconnections, but they are not valuable in
themselves. Second, it is quite evidently not beyond human abilities to manipulate ecosystem processes. The matter at issue is, of course, to manage ecosystems wisely – at
least in our own interests, but also, I believe, in the interests of all the creatures within
them, and perhaps also in the interests of ecosystems as “emergent systems” whose
properties are greater than the sums of their parts. My view is that an “environmental
ethic” is also practical: we can only ensure sustainability if we treat all organisms and
natural systems as having “interests worthy of consideration” (Johnson 1991).
My standpoint is close to that summarized by Miller’s (2006) account of one
millennia-old strand of Chinese thought, that of Daoism.
Daoists view morality in medical terms: goodness consists of the optimal health of a system
comprised of various interdependent subsystems. This medical concept of virtue can… be
useful in constructing an ecological ethics, one that recognizes that humans cannot act for
their own good without considering the overall health of the ecosystems in which they are
embedded.… the ideal state is achieved through embodying the complex transformative
power of nature rather than denying it.
Such emphasis on “connectedness” does have its own intellectual pitfalls, exemplified by the false “science” of astrology, based on the notion of connection
between the human microcosm and the astronomical macrocosm. Nevertheless,
I think that most of our present-day ecological science is well grounded in
Enlightenment rationality and scientific methods, and the idea of ecosystem health
is, at the very least, useful for devising monitoring programmes. I will return to
this idea later.
It may be that the western, utilitarian approach, grows from our biblical heritage.
In Genesis 1:26 it is written:
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all
the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
P. Tett
Ecosystem-based management is currently a highly topical issue and is being widely
discussed in the context of fisheries management. Introduction of the new Common
Fisheries Policy (CFP) in January 2003 focused on this approach as the way forward to a
sustainable fishing industry. Marine fisheries are one of the remaining examples of human
endeavour involving the direct exploitation of wild animal populations. Fisheries are dependent
on the productivity of the ecosystem, and fisheries have an effect on, and are affected by,
the supporting ecosystem of the target species. It, therefore, follows that prudent and
responsible fisheries management should take account of the profound interactions
between fisheries and their supporting ecosystem.
[However,] ecosystem-based management is not about managing or manipulating ecosystem processes, something that is clearly beyond our abilities. Rather, ecosystem-based
management is concerned with ensuring that fishery management decisions do not
adversely affect the ecosystem function and productivity, so that harvesting of target stocks
(and resultant economic benefits) is sustainable in the long-term. Traditional systems of
management, which have tended to focus on individual stocks or species, have not achieved
this objective and consequently the economic activity that the ecosystem supports has
become compromised.
To my mind, this account falls short in several ways. First, it tends to suggest that the
purpose of ecosystems is merely to produce food, or other services, for humans: it may
be prudent to take account of the dynamic interconnections, but they are not valuable in
themselves. Second, it is quite evidently not beyond human abilities to manipulate ecosystem processes. The matter at issue is, of course, to manage ecosystems wisely – at
least in our own interests, but also, I believe, in the interests of all the creatures within
them, and perhaps also in the interests of ecosystems as “emergent systems” whose
properties are greater than the sums of their parts. My view is that an “environmental
ethic” is also practical: we can only ensure sustainability if we treat all organisms and
natural systems as having “interests worthy of consideration” (Johnson 1991).
My standpoint is close to that summarized by Miller’s (2006) account of one
millennia-old strand of Chinese thought, that of Daoism.
Daoists view morality in medical terms: goodness consists of the optimal health of a system
comprised of various interdependent subsystems. This medical concept of virtue can… be
useful in constructing an ecological ethics, one that recognizes that humans cannot act for
their own good without considering the overall health of the ecosystems in which they are
embedded.… the ideal state is achieved through embodying the complex transformative
power of nature rather than denying it.
Such emphasis on “connectedness” does have its own intellectual pitfalls, exemplified by the false “science” of astrology, based on the notion of connection
between the human microcosm and the astronomical macrocosm. Nevertheless,
I think that most of our present-day ecological science is well grounded in
Enlightenment rationality and scientific methods, and the idea of ecosystem health
is, at the very least, useful for devising monitoring programmes. I will return to
this idea later.
It may be that the western, utilitarian approach, grows from our biblical heritage.
In Genesis 1:26 it is written:
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all
the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.