Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMeinard, Yves
dc.contributor.authorCoq, Sylvain
dc.contributor.authorSchmid, Bernhard
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-10T10:46:31Z
dc.date.available2019-10-10T10:46:31Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.urihttps://basepub.dauphine.fr/handle/123456789/20063
dc.descriptionEn Open Access sur le site de Springeren
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subjectBiodiversityen
dc.subjectDefinitionen
dc.subjectConservation practiceen
dc.subjectProblem solvingen
dc.subjectDecision analysisen
dc.subject.ddc003en
dc.titleThe vagueness of "biodiversity" and its implications in practiceen
dc.typeChapitre d'ouvrage
dc.description.abstractenThe vagueness of the notion of biodiversity is discussed in the philosophical literature but most ecologists admit that it is unproblematic in practice. We analyze a series of case studies to argue that this denial of the importance of clarifying the definition of biodiversity has worrying implications in practice, at three levels: it can impair the coordination of conservation actions, hide the need to improve management knowledge and cover up incompatibilities between disciplinary assumptions. This is because the formal agreement on the term “biodiversity” can hide profound disagreements on the nature of conservation issues. We then explore avenues to unlock this situation, using the literature in decision analysis. Decision analysts claim that decision-makers requesting decision-support often do not precisely know for what problem they request support. Clarifying a better formulation, eliminating vagueness, is therefore a critical step for decision analysis. We explain how this logic can be implemented in our case studies and similar situations, where various interacting actors face complex, multifaceted problems that they have to solve collectively. To sum up, although “biodiversity” has long been considered a flagship to galvanize conservation action, the vagueness of the term actually complicates this perennial task of conservation practitioners. As conservation scientists, we have a duty to stop promoting a term whose vagueness impairs conservation practice. This approach allows introducing a dynamic definition of “biodiversity practices”, designed to play the integrating role that the term “biodiversity” cannot achieve, due to the ambiguity of its general definition.en
dc.identifier.citationpages353-374en
dc.relation.ispartofseriestitleHistory, Philosophy and Theory of the Life Sciencesen
dc.relation.ispartoftitleFrom Assessing to Conserving Biodiversity Conceptual and Practical Challengesen
dc.relation.ispartofeditorCasetta, Elena
dc.relation.ispartofeditorMarques da Silva, Jorge
dc.relation.ispartofeditorVecchi, Davide
dc.relation.ispartofpublnameSpringeren
dc.relation.ispartofpublcityBerlin Heidelbergen
dc.relation.ispartofdate2019
dc.relation.ispartofpages452en
dc.relation.ispartofurl10.1007/978-3-030-10991-2en
dc.subject.ddclabelRecherche opérationnelleen
dc.relation.ispartofisbn978-3-030-10991-2en
dc.relation.forthcomingnonen
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/978-3-030-10991-2_17en
dc.description.ssrncandidatenonen
dc.description.halcandidateouien
dc.description.readershiprechercheen
dc.description.audienceInternationalen
dc.date.updated2019-10-10T10:30:43Z
hal.person.labIds989
hal.person.labIds171392
hal.person.labIds211556
hal.identifierhal-02310644*


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record