Roots, relevance, aims and values
5
concerning the conservation of biodiversity. In a now
classic paper, Graham Caughley (1994) pointed out
that conservation biology research mainly operates
within two overriding paradigms – studies that seek an
understanding of the proximate causes of population
decline (the declining population paradigm) and those
that are concerned with the consequences of small
population size (the small population paradigm).
More recently there has been an acknowledgement
that a biological understanding of rarity and endangerment is necessary, but not suffi cient for policymaking designed to prevent biodiversity loss, and that
conservation biology needs to incorporate a far broader
range of disciplines. Indeed, conservation biology textbooks typically include a wider array of basic scientifi c
and other academic disciplines, including such fi elds as
anthropology, biogeography, environmental economics, environmental ethics, sociology and environmental law (e.g. see Primack, 2002 ). The incorporation of
the social sciences under the umbrella of conservation
(i.e. biological) science represents a recognition of the
need to apply multiple forms of scholarship to address
complex real - world problems. It may also refl ect a
general desire to bestow scholarly discourse and guidance with the additional gravitas associated with a
‘ proper science ’ given the status of scientifi c guidance
within late 20th century society and politics (see, e.g.
Knight & Cowling, 2007 ).
Last to emerge within the framework shown in
Figure 1.1 is conservation biogeography, a term that
began to gain currency via a conference of the
International Biogeography Society in Washington in
January 2005 (Lomolino & Heaney, 2004 ), and that
we ourselves promoted through a paper published the
same month in the journal Diversity and Distributions ,
which simultaneously gained the sub - title ‘ A Journal of
Conservation Biogeography ’ . We subsequently realized
that the term had been fi rst coined at least twelve years
earlier by John Grehan (1993) in the title of a paper in
the fi rst issue of the same journal (then called
Biodiversity Letters ), although he did not defi ne in any
precise way what he meant by the term.
Whereas the formal use of the term may be recent,
the use of biogeography within conservation biology
has been going on for as long as scientifi c guidance
to conservation has been offered, and biogeography
indeed formed a central part of early theory within
conservation biology (see, e.g. Primack, 2002 ). Classic
foundational works combining biogeographical analysis with conservation guidance include the early papers
biogeography). At the core of the discipline is an interest in describing, explaining and predicting patterns of
distribution and diversity, whether at higher taxa level,
species level, or most recently also sub - species levels of
analysis.
The modern conservation movement emerged in the
late 19th century in response to fundamental changes
in world views concerning the nature of the relationship between humans and the natural world, and it
emanated largely from the elite society of the American
East Coast and Western Europe (Jepson & Whittaker,
2002a ). The movement was motivated both by a desire
to preserve sites with special meaning for the intellectual and aesthetic contemplation of nature, and by
acceptance that the human conquest of nature carries
with it a moral responsibility to ensure the survival of
threatened life forms. These early principles were later
combined with a range of more utilitarian perspectives
but, over the fi rst half of the 20th century, the primary
motivating forces were the conservation of wildlife,
especially large game animals and birds, and the desire
to preserve places of natural beauty and wonder
(Figure 1.1 , Box 1.1 ).
Over time, the conservation movement diversifi ed
with increasing recognition of other (often deeply
rooted) motivating ideas alongside the immediate
imperative of saving particular types of species from
extinction. Thus, nature conservation can be thought
of as a social movement working to develop or reassert
certain values in society concerning the human/
nature relationship (Jepson & Whittaker, 2002a ). The
movement gained new momentum in the second half
of the 20th century, when science and environmentalism further expanded understandings of our relationship with nature (Frank et al. , 1999 ; Adams 2004 ).
Motivated by, but distinct from, the nature conservation movement, ‘ conservation biology ’ is the name
given to applied research designed to inform management decisions concerning the conservation of biodiversity. As such, its roots lie largely within the mid 20th
century. Conservation biology gained huge momentum during the 1970s and early 1980s, when it was
formally identifi ed as a sub - discipline, with dedicated
journals and textbooks (e.g. Soul é 1986 ; Primack,
2002 ) and learned societies such as the Society for
Conservation Biology, founded in 1986 and presently
with over 10,000 members.
Conservation biology can be defi ned narrowly as
being concerned with the application of population
biology, taxonomy and genetics to problems
5
concerning the conservation of biodiversity. In a now
classic paper, Graham Caughley (1994) pointed out
that conservation biology research mainly operates
within two overriding paradigms – studies that seek an
understanding of the proximate causes of population
decline (the declining population paradigm) and those
that are concerned with the consequences of small
population size (the small population paradigm).
More recently there has been an acknowledgement
that a biological understanding of rarity and endangerment is necessary, but not suffi cient for policymaking designed to prevent biodiversity loss, and that
conservation biology needs to incorporate a far broader
range of disciplines. Indeed, conservation biology textbooks typically include a wider array of basic scientifi c
and other academic disciplines, including such fi elds as
anthropology, biogeography, environmental economics, environmental ethics, sociology and environmental law (e.g. see Primack, 2002 ). The incorporation of
the social sciences under the umbrella of conservation
(i.e. biological) science represents a recognition of the
need to apply multiple forms of scholarship to address
complex real - world problems. It may also refl ect a
general desire to bestow scholarly discourse and guidance with the additional gravitas associated with a
‘ proper science ’ given the status of scientifi c guidance
within late 20th century society and politics (see, e.g.
Knight & Cowling, 2007 ).
Last to emerge within the framework shown in
Figure 1.1 is conservation biogeography, a term that
began to gain currency via a conference of the
International Biogeography Society in Washington in
January 2005 (Lomolino & Heaney, 2004 ), and that
we ourselves promoted through a paper published the
same month in the journal Diversity and Distributions ,
which simultaneously gained the sub - title ‘ A Journal of
Conservation Biogeography ’ . We subsequently realized
that the term had been fi rst coined at least twelve years
earlier by John Grehan (1993) in the title of a paper in
the fi rst issue of the same journal (then called
Biodiversity Letters ), although he did not defi ne in any
precise way what he meant by the term.
Whereas the formal use of the term may be recent,
the use of biogeography within conservation biology
has been going on for as long as scientifi c guidance
to conservation has been offered, and biogeography
indeed formed a central part of early theory within
conservation biology (see, e.g. Primack, 2002 ). Classic
foundational works combining biogeographical analysis with conservation guidance include the early papers
biogeography). At the core of the discipline is an interest in describing, explaining and predicting patterns of
distribution and diversity, whether at higher taxa level,
species level, or most recently also sub - species levels of
analysis.
The modern conservation movement emerged in the
late 19th century in response to fundamental changes
in world views concerning the nature of the relationship between humans and the natural world, and it
emanated largely from the elite society of the American
East Coast and Western Europe (Jepson & Whittaker,
2002a ). The movement was motivated both by a desire
to preserve sites with special meaning for the intellectual and aesthetic contemplation of nature, and by
acceptance that the human conquest of nature carries
with it a moral responsibility to ensure the survival of
threatened life forms. These early principles were later
combined with a range of more utilitarian perspectives
but, over the fi rst half of the 20th century, the primary
motivating forces were the conservation of wildlife,
especially large game animals and birds, and the desire
to preserve places of natural beauty and wonder
(Figure 1.1 , Box 1.1 ).
Over time, the conservation movement diversifi ed
with increasing recognition of other (often deeply
rooted) motivating ideas alongside the immediate
imperative of saving particular types of species from
extinction. Thus, nature conservation can be thought
of as a social movement working to develop or reassert
certain values in society concerning the human/
nature relationship (Jepson & Whittaker, 2002a ). The
movement gained new momentum in the second half
of the 20th century, when science and environmentalism further expanded understandings of our relationship with nature (Frank et al. , 1999 ; Adams 2004 ).
Motivated by, but distinct from, the nature conservation movement, ‘ conservation biology ’ is the name
given to applied research designed to inform management decisions concerning the conservation of biodiversity. As such, its roots lie largely within the mid 20th
century. Conservation biology gained huge momentum during the 1970s and early 1980s, when it was
formally identifi ed as a sub - discipline, with dedicated
journals and textbooks (e.g. Soul é 1986 ; Primack,
2002 ) and learned societies such as the Society for
Conservation Biology, founded in 1986 and presently
with over 10,000 members.
Conservation biology can be defi ned narrowly as
being concerned with the application of population
biology, taxonomy and genetics to problems