SUBJECT: Ecological values and biodiversity conservation
AUTHOR: John Hutcheson
DATE: 3rd April 2003

KEYWORDS: Ecological value, belief systems, buffering.

SUMMARY: The author argues that the basic functional capacities of the biosphere are observable at any ecological scale, and that in order to maintain this natural buffer system we need to change the way humans operate.


Martin Sharman made the comment, "But I don't think that we can defend wholesale the idea that there is a scientifically demonstrated ecological value of biodiversity".

I cannot agree. We have the observable facts that biodiversity (the new word for life) creates and maintains conditions suitable for life as far as this is possible on a sphere spinning, wobbling, and whizzing round the sun. This was reported for the global scale by Lovelock some 35 years ago, with what has come to be known as Gaia theory as Lynn Margulis provided bacteriological mechanisms. However, the basic process of life buffering physical parameters is observable at any ecological scale, from a sheltered garden to the planet.

The most fascinating aspect of these "scientifically demonstrated ecological value"(s) is that the basic concept of an entity larger than man, nurturing and protecting life, is difficult to differentiate from the concept of 'God', (or the belief systems of vernacular societies). Also, of course, global homeostasis provides 'purpose to the design', thereby undercutting the basic scientific assumption (extended from the simple science of physics) that reality is non-teleological, and throwing a big question mark into all analytical scientific methodology applied to ecology.

The functional capacity (buffering) provided by the biosphere is now being threatened (as reflected in the increasing extent and frequencies of climatic extremes - just as our societal organisation makes us increasingly susceptible to being affected by them). The only prospect we have of sustaining our society is to re-extend the natural buffer systems as much as possible and as extensively as possible. We can only hope to do that if mankind can live within (and utilize) these natural systems - because we are everywhere. 20% cover of reserves ain't enough (as is apparent from an economics analogy - if you spend 80% of your capital, you are going down).

Perhaps if people saw environmental destruction as 'killing God', we might make sufficient change to the way humans operate that the planetary buffering system might continue to support our society. However, given that our population doubled from 3 billion in 1970 to 6 billion in 2000, and that this was shorter than the time required for a change in our collective scientific paradigm of purposelessness, I don't hold out much hope, do you?

A contribution by:

John Hutcheson
Biological systems Ltd.
Forest Research Associates
POBox 1031, Rotorua, New Zealand