Ang, F. and Van Passel, S. (2012) Beyond the environmentalist's paradox and the debate on weak versus strong sustainability. BioScience, 62 (3). pp. 251-259. ISSN 1525-3244 doi: 10.1525/bio.2012.62.3.6
Abstract/Summary
Environmentalists generally argue that ecological damage will (eventually) lead to declines in human well-being. From this perspective, the recent introduction of the “environmentalist’s paradox” in BioScience by Raudsepp-Hearne and colleagues (2010) is particularly significant. In essence, Raudsepp-Hearne and colleagues (2010) claimed that although ecosystem services have been degraded, human well-being—paradoxically—has increased. In this article, we show that this debate is in fact rooted in a broader discussion on weak sustainability versus strong sustainability(the substitutability of human-made capital for natural capital). We warn against the reductive nature of focusing only on a stock–flow framework in which a natural-capital stock produces ecosystem services. Concretely, we recommend a holistic approach in which the complexity, irreversibility, uncertainty, and ethical predicaments intrinsic to the natural environment and its connections to humanity are also considered.
Altmetric Badge
Item Type | Article |
URI | https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/38645 |
Item Type | Article |
Refereed | Yes |
Divisions | No Reading authors. Back catalogue items Life Sciences > School of Agriculture, Policy and Development > Farm Management Unit |
Uncontrolled Keywords | ecology; natural resources; assessments; sustainability |
Publisher | American Institute of Biological Sciences |
Download/View statistics | View download statistics for this item |
University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record