Introduction – humans, nature and human nature - Ecological Applications: Toward a Sustainable World - page 21

food and industrial goods, to harvest natural resources and to control pests. But
they also value nature and recognize the need to protect biodiversity. These nonex-
tremists, of course, also have a variety of views - some are closer to the preserva-
tionist end of the spectrum (happy to have a lower standard of living for the sake
of the natural world) and others are more exploitationist in their view (requiring
that only a small portion of the natural world be protected - to be enjoyed as a rec-
reational walker, an ecotourist or in a natural history fi lm). Reconciling these views
remains a challenge. But given the accumulating evidence of adverse effects of our
activities, where many impacts only become apparent in the long term, we need to
rise to the challenge.
Is it possible to take a completely objective approach to determine just how far
we can push the drive to exploit - or, conversely, to decide how much of the natural
world should be maintained in a completely pristine state, or be protected at some
level? This is not easy, to say the least, but we can get close by pursuing a particular
aim - that of sustainability. To call an activity 'sustainable' means that it can be
continued or repeated in future. If people wish to have tuna to eat in future, they
cannot continue to harvest them from the sea faster than the population can replace
those that are lost. Nor can farmers continue to use fertilizers indiscriminately if
people want to retain the ecosystem services provided by rivers, lakes and oceans
that are impacted by the agricultural excess. And on the largest scale of all, our
present reliance on fossil fuels puts at risk, through global climate change, the sus-
tainability of all our activities, whether exploitative or protective. In essence, a sus-
tainable society is one able to meet current needs without compromising the ability
of future generations to provide for themselves. Sustainable behavior, in other
words, provides the best outcomes for both human and natural systems - now and
in future.
One of the problems with the idea of sustainability is that it can only be defi ned
on the basis of what is known now. But what about the many factors that are
unknown or unpredictable? Things might take a turn for the worse - when locally
adverse oceanographic conditions damage a fi shery already suffering from overex-
ploitation, or global climate change increases fl ood risk in a region already prone
to fl ooding because of deforestation. On the other hand, some people tend to down-
play the risk - because Homo sapiens is so smart. Thus, they believe that technologi-
cal advances will allow activities to be sustained that previously seemed unsustainable
- the invention of processes to remove pollutants from the outfl ows of power sta-
tions and industry, or of a pesticide more precisely targeted on the pest and without
harm to innocent bystanders. But it would be risky indeed to have faith that there
will always be a technological 'fi x' to solve current environmental problems. Homo
sapiens needs to become truly wise, factoring in all conceivable risks to sustainabil-
ity scenarios.
The recognition of the importance of sustainability as a unifying idea can be said
to have come of age in 1991. This was the year that the Ecological Society of America
published The sustainable biosphere initiative: an ecological research agenda (Lubchenco
et al . , 1991), and the World Conservation Union, the United Nations Environment
Programme and the World Wide Fund for Nature jointly published Caring for the
Earth: a strategy for sustainable living (IUCN/UNEP/WWF, 1991).
The emphasis shifted more recently from a purely ecological perspective to one
that incorporates economic and social conditions that infl uence sustainability