“The ‘future of conservation’ debate: Defending ecocentrism and the Nature Needs Half movement”

Originally published by Biological Conservation By Helen Kopnina, Haydn Washington, Joe Gray, Bron Taylor Abstract The Future of Conservation survey, launched in March 2017, has proposed a framework to help with interpreting the array of ethical stances underpinning the motivations for biological conservation. In this article we highlight what is missing in this debate to date. Our overall aim is to explore what an acceptance of ecocentric ethics would mean for how conservation is practised and how its policies are developed. We start by discussing the shortcomings of the survey and present a more convincing and accurate categorization of the conservation debate. Conceiving the future of conservation as nothing less than an attempt to preserve abundant life on earth, we illustrate the strategic and ethical advantage of ecocentric over anthropocentric approaches to conservation. After examining key areas of the current debate we endorse and defend the Nature Needs Half and bio-proportionality proposals. These proposals show how the acceptance of an ecocentric framework would aid both practices and policies aimed at promoting successful conservation. We conclude that these proposals bring a radically different and more effective approach to conservation than anthropocentric approaches, even though the latter purport to be pragmatic. Read the full journal...

Nature Needs Half in Sanctuary Asia Magazine

Article by Vance G. Martin, president of The WILD Foundation, originally published in Sanctuary Asia Magazine, December 2010 We have one life, you got to do what you should. One life, with each other… sisters, brothers. One life, but we’re not the same, we got to carry each other, carry each other. (One, U2, 1992) © Morgan Heim What does everyone have in common? Needs. As environmentalists we are more than aware of those who regard nature solely as a commodity and who pursue their “needs” through a worldview that sees nothing in natural land/seascapes except money-making opportunities – logging, mining, fishing, real estate development, agriculture and more. The catch-all term for such needy people is “developer.” In reality these pursuits are as old as humans are and are of course not inherently bad – natural resource use is an essential and necessary activity. However, unchecked, over-exploitive natural resource use creates a hydra-headed demon whose faces are population growth, consumerism, technological advances, human greed and poverty. The result is before us in the currently unfolding rampant, destructive and ultimately suicidal attack on wild nature that sustains all life on Earth. As concerned and engaged environmentalists, we love nature and we dedicate our lives and work to protecting her from such flagrant disregard and abuse. But let’s look at some of our own needs of a different sort. Yes, we all have nature-based needs, even those of us who try to manage our consumerism, carbon footprint, and the like. We might be mountain-bikers lobbying for more trails in a national park so we can do our thing in nature without bothering hikers on existing trails. We may be fishermen who want a new stream or coral reef opened up or the catch limit extended. > Read the full Sanctuary...
Space for Nature: Zoological Society of London

Space for Nature: Zoological Society of London

The Zoological Society of London   – the world’s oldest and most renowned conservation science organization, working in over 50 countries – has joined with WILD to explore and illustrate how Nature Needs Half is both necessary and possible. “Space for Nature,” a video created by the Zoological Society of London (with participation from The WILD Foundation & Nature Needs Half), explores how the Nature Needs Half vision can be realized in practice by setting aside space for...