Engaging with the science and politics of biodiversity futures: A literature review

Carina Wyborn*, Elena Louder, Mike Harfoot, Samantha Hill

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

    13 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Future global environmental change will have a significant impact on biodiversity through the intersecting forces of climate change, urbanization, human population growth, overexploitation, and pollution. This presents a fundamental challenge to conservation approaches, which seek to conserve past or current assemblages of species or ecosystems in situ. This review canvases diverse approaches to biodiversity futures, including social science scholarship on the Anthropocene and futures thinking alongside models and scenarios from the biophysical science community. It argues that charting biodiversity futures requires processes that must include broad sections of academia and the conservation community to ask what desirable futures look like, and for whom. These efforts confront political and philosophical questions about levels of acceptable loss, and how trade-offs can be made in ways that address the injustices in the distribution of costs and benefits across and within human and non-human life forms. As such, this review proposes that charting biodiversity futures is inherently normative and political. Drawing on diverse scholarship united under a banner of 'futures thinking' this review presents an array of methods, approaches and concepts that provide a foundation from which to consider research and decision-making that enables action in the context of contested and uncertain biodiversity futures.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)8-15
    Number of pages8
    JournalEnvironmental Conservation
    Volume48
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Mar 2021

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Engaging with the science and politics of biodiversity futures: A literature review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this