Abstract

The theory of evolution by natural selection can help explain why people care about other species. Building upon recent insights that morality evolves to secure fitness advantages of cooperation, we propose that conservation ethics (moral beliefs, attitudes, intuitions and norms regarding other species) could be adaptations that support cooperation between humans and non-humans. We present eco-evolutionary cost–benefit models of conservation behaviours as interspecific cooperation (altruism towards members of other species). We find that an evolutionary rule identical in structure to Hamilton's rule (which explains altruistic behaviour towards related conspecifics) can explain altruistic behaviour towards members of other species. Natural selection will favour traits for selectively altering the success of members of other species (e.g. conserving them) in ways that maximize inclusive fitness return benefits. Conservation behaviours and the ethics that evolve to reinforce them will be sensitive to local ecological and socio-cultural conditions, so will assume different contours in different places. Difficulties accurately assessing costs and benefits provided by other species, time required to adapt to ecological and socio-cultural change and barriers to collective action could explain the apparent contradiction between the widespread existence of conservation ethics and patterns of biodiversity decline globally.

Highlights

  • Why should we care about biodiversity loss and ecological change? Which species should we conserve, and why? Are species valuable because they contribute to human well-being, or for their own sake? To what extent should people consider the interests of non-humans in conservation? How we answer these enduring moral questions will influence our impacts on ecosystems that support human and non-human life [1]

  • We develop general evolutionary cost –benefit models of interspecific cooperation that can apply to human conservation behaviour

  • adaptive conservation rule (ACR) represents a general rule for maximizing net inclusive fitness outcomes of altering the success of members of other species

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Why should we care about biodiversity loss and ecological change? Which species should we conserve, and why? Are species valuable because they contribute to human well-being, or for their own sake? To what extent should people consider the interests of non-humans in conservation? How we answer these enduring moral questions will influence our impacts on ecosystems that support human and non-human life [1]. Conservation ethics (individual-level moral beliefs, attitudes and intuitions, as well as population-level social norms regarding other species) appear to be widespread. Concerns about unsustainable human impacts on ecosystems [3,5,6,7,8] and calls for a concomitant recalibration of values and institutions [9 –13] suggest that the moral dimensions of ecological change and biodiversity loss resonate deeply. Conserve and respect other species are evident in social norms and cultural traditions around the world and over time [14,15,16,17], and in contemporary individual moral beliefs, attitudes and intuitions across societies [18,19,20,21]. Fundamental disagreements about why conservation is important and the nature of human obligations to other species [22 –24] cast doubt on whether conservation ethics will be able to inspire actions that successfully reduce or reverse biodiversity loss globally

Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call