Search

Habitats (where we live), habits (how we live), and inhabitants (who we are) constitute an ecosystem unit. The biosphere is composed of a reticulate mosaic of these habitat-habit-inhabitant units, where humans (with their indigenous languages, ecological knowledge, and practices) have coevolved. Today, these diverse ecosystem units are being violently destroyed by the imposition of a single global colonial cultural model. In Cape Horn at the southern end of the Americas, educators, authorities, and decision makers do not know about the native habitats, language, and flora, and do not distinguish between Cape Horn's flora and the flora that grows in other parts of the country or the world. In contrast, indigenous people and old residents have a detailed knowledge, but they do not participate in education, and decision making. It is not Homo sapiens in general, but bioculturally biased educators, authorities, and decision makers who need to be transformed into (educated and responsible) members and citizen of biocultural communities. The Omora Ethnobotanical Park educational program was launched to contribute to a biocultural citizenship involving three critical steps: (1) the disclosing of biocultural diversity with a 'fine filter' approach that permits understanding of the cultural and ecological diversity hidden by general universal labels; (2) direct 'face-to-face' encounters with human and nonhuman co-inhabitants; and (3) actions for protection of habitats and implementation of interpretative spaces that facilitate direct encounters and conservation of biocultural diversity. These steps have been implemented at local and regional scales through the creation of the Omora Ethnobotanical Park and the UNESCO Cape Horn Biosphere Reserve.

Long-term ecological research (LTER), addressing problems that encompass decadal or longer time frames, began as a formal term and program in the United States in 1980. While long-term ecological studies and observation began as early as the 1400s and 1800s in Asia and Europe, respectively, the long-term approach was not formalized until the establishment of the U.S. long-term ecological research programs. These programs permitted ecosystem-level experiments and cross-site comparisons that led to insights into the biosphere's structure and function. The holistic ecosystem approach of this initiative also allowed the incorporation of the human-dimension of ecology and recently has given rise to a new concept of long-term socio-ecological research (LTSER). Today, long-term ecological research programs exist in at least thirty-two countries (i.e., members of the International Long-Term Ecological Research Network, ILTER). However, consolidation of the international network within the long-term socio-ecological research paradigm still requires: (1) inclusion of certain remote regions of the world, such as southwestern South America, that are still poorly represented; (2) modifications of the type of research conducted, such as integrating social and natural sciences with the humanities and ethics; and (3) the incorporation of findings and results into broader social and political processes. In this context, a nascent long-term socio-ecological research network in Chile, which extends over the longest latitudinal range of temperate forest in the Southern Hemisphere, adds a new remote region to international long-term ecological research previously overlooked. In addition, collaboration with the University of North Texas and other international partners helps to further develop an interdisciplinary approach for the integration of the ecological sciences and environmental philosophy together with traditional ecological knowledge, informal and formal education, policy, the humanities, socio-political processes, and biocultural conservation.

A case study of socio-ecological research conducted in Puerto Williams, Chile reveals that persons belonging to different sociocultural groups in Cape Horn have a diversity of perspectives and relationships with nature. For example, a strong sense of home and belonging was expressed by the indigenous Yahgan community and by old residents, mostly descendents of early twentieth-century colonizers. However, people identified with resource use did not include positive answers for a sense of home. The concept of common land presented marked contrasts among respondents. Those identified with a cultivating type of relationship favored private property over public land. For respondents identified with an embedded type of relationship, freedom of movement was one of their most essential values. Some respondents identified with resource use and those identified with intellectual and aesthetic relationships with nature also valued common land. The approach used in this study transforms polarized and dichotomous notions into gradients of perspectives related to different degrees of local and global ecological and cultural environments. The resulting hybrid vision of perspectives on nature may be helpful in times of global change, where both local and global scales contribute to identify specific problematic asymmetries as well as opportunities for communication among different sociocultural groups.

La cultura de la sociedad global habitualmente asocia la palabra animal con vertebrados. Paradójicamente, la mayor parte de la diversidad animal está compuesta por pequeños organismos que permanecen invisibles en la cultura global y están sub-representados en la filosofía, las ciencias y la educación. La ciencia del siglo veintiuno ha desentrañado que muchos invertebrados tienen conciencia y capacidad de sentir dolor. Estos descubrimientos apelan a los filósofos de la ética animal a ser más inclusivos y reevaluar la participación de los invertebrados en la comunidad moral. La ciencia también ha advertido sobre la desaparición de los pequeños co-habitantes animales en medio de la sexta extinción masiva. Esta extinción "invisible" apela a los filósofos ambientales a visibilizar a los invertebrados, cuya existencia es preciosa en sí misma y para el funcionamiento de los ecosistemas de los cuales dependen la biodiversidad y las sociedades humanas. Con un enfoque biocultural que integra dimensiones biofísicas y culturales de la biodiversidad, investigo las raíces del chovinismo taxonómico asociado con la sub-representación y la subordinación de los invertebrados en la filosofía y las ciencias modernas. Las malas noticias son que constatamos un marcado vertebratismo en el imaginario animal. Las buenas noticias son que David Hume, Charles Darwin y la ética biocultural proporcionan bases conceptuales para cultivar un aprecio por los pequeños co-habitantes con quienes compartimos nuestros hábitats locales y la biosfera global. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The culture of global society commonly associates the word animal with vertebrates. Paradoxically, most of animal diversity is composed of small organisms that remain invisible in the global culture and are underrepresented in philosophy, science, and education. Twenty-first century science has revealed that many invertebrates have consciousness and the capacity to feel pain. These discoveries urge animal ethicists to be more inclusive and to reevaluate the participation of invertebrates in the moral community. Science also has warned of the disappearance of small animal co-inhabitants that is occurring in the midst of the sixth mass extinction. This "invisible extinction" compels environmental philosophers to make visible invertebrates, whose existence is precious in itself and for the functioning of ecosystems on which biodiversity and human societies depend. With a biocultural approach that integrates the biophysical and cultural dimensions of biodiversity, I investigate the roots of taxonomic chauvinism associated with the under-representation and subordination of invertebrates in modern philosophy and science. The bad news is the confirmation of a marked vertebratism in animal imagery. The good news is that David Hume, Charles Darwin, and biocultural ethics provide conceptual foundations for cultivating an appreciation of the small co-inhabitants with whom we share our local habitats and the global biosphere. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At the beginning of the twenty-first century. South America hosts the world's greatest diversity of plants and most animal groups, as well as a variety of environmental movements, involving urban and rural communities. South American academic philosophy, however, has given little consideration to this rich biocultural context. To nourish an emergent regional environmental philosophy three main sources can be identified. First, a variety of ancient and contemporary ecological worldviews and practices offer a rich biocultural array of South American environmental thought that can be disclosed and valued through the work of cultural anthropology, liberation philosophy, liberation pedagogy, liberation theology, ecofeminism, and biocultural conservation. Second, some recent academic environmental philosophy research and teaching teams have been formed in South American universities with the support of the interdisciplinary United Nations Environmental Programme or based on the individual interests of some scattered scholars. Third, social movements have increasingly demanded the incorporation of environmental values into regional policies and decision-making processes. These three sources can foster intercultural, international, and transdisciplinary dialogues to further develop a South American environmental philosophy grounded in its precious biocultural diversity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A comienzos del siglo XXI, América del Sur alberga la mayor biodiversidad del mundo para la mayoría de los grupos de plantas y animales, como también una variedad de movimientos en defensa del medio ambiente, que incluyen comunidades urbanas y rurales. La filosofía académica sudamericana, sin embargo, ha prestado escasa atención a este rico contexto biocultural. Para nutrir una filosofía ambiental regional emergente, identifico tres fuentes principales. Primero, una variedad de cosmovisiones y prácticas ecológicas, ancestrales y contemporáneas ofrecen un rico espectro biocultural de pensamiento ambiental de América del Sur que puede ser examinado y valorado a través del trabajo de la antropología cultural, la filosofía de la liberación, la pedagogía de la liberación, la teología de la liberación, el ecofeminismo y la conservación biocultural. En segundo lugar, en las universidades de América del Sur se han formado recientemente algunos grupos interdisciplinarios académicos en la investigación y enseñanza de la filosofía ambiental, con el apoyo del Programa de las Naciones Unidas del Medio Ambiente, o gracias a los intereses individuales de algunos investigadores. En tercer lugar, expresiones artisticas y movimientos sociales han demandado cada vez más la incorporación de valores ambientales en las políticas regionales y en los procesos de toma de decisiones. Estas tres fuentes pueden fomentar el diálogo intercultural, internacional y transdisciplinario para seguir desarrollando una filosofía ambiental sudamericana que brote desde su extraordinaria diversidad biocultural. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biocultural homogenization involves three major drivers: (a) the physical barrier to everyday contact with biodiversity derived from the rapid growth of urban population, (b) the conceptual barrier derived from the omission in formal and non-formal education of native languages that contain a broad spectrum of traditional ecological knowledge and values, and (c) political barriers associated with the elimination or reduction of the teaching of ethics under the prevailing neoliberal economy governance since the 1960s. Biocultural ethics aims at overcoming these barriers by recovering the vital links between biological and cultural diversity, between the habits and the habitats of the inhabitants. These links are acknowledged by early Western philosophy, Amerindian traditional ecological knowledge, and contemporary ecological and evolutionary sciences, but have been lost in prevailing modern ethics. There is an overlooked diversity of forms of knowing and inhabiting regional ecosystems, each of them having diverse environmental and social consequences. A better understanding of the regionally diverse mosaics of ecosystems, languages, and cultures facilitates the distinction of specific causes and responsible agents of environmental problems, and the disclosure of sustainable practices, forms of ecological knowledge and values that offer already existing options to solve socio-ecological problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Un estudio de caso de investigación socio-ecológica realizado en Puerto Williams, Cabo de Hornos (Chile), revela que las personas pertenecientes a diferentes grupos socioculturales poseen una diversidad de perspectivas y relaciones con la naturaleza. Por ejemplo, los miembros de la Comunidad Indígena Yagán y los antiguos residentes (en su mayoría descendientes de colonos de principios del siglo XX), expresaron un fuerte sentimiento de pertenencia y hogar. Sin embargo, las personas identificadas con el uso de los recursos no tuvo respuestas positivas respecto al sentimiento de hogar. Entre los entrevistados, el concepto de un territorio común presentó contrastes muy marcados. Aquellos que se identificaban con un tipo de relación de cultivo de la tierra favorecieron la propiedad privada sobre la pública. Para los entrevistados con una relación de tipo integrado con la naturaleza, la libertad de movimiento fue uno de los valores esenciales. Algunos de los entrevistados identificados con el uso de los recursos y con relaciones intelectuales y estéticas con la naturaleza, valoraron también de manera positiva la tierra como bien común. La aproximación utilizada en este estudio transforma las nociones polarizadas y dicotómicas en gradientes de perspectivas relacionadas a diferentes grados de ambientes ecológicos y culturales, locales y globales. La visión híbrida resultante de las perspectivas acerca de la naturaleza puede ser de utilidad en tiempos de cambio global, donde tanto escalas locales como globales contribuyen a identificar problemáticas asimétricas específicas, como también oportunidades de comunicación entre los diferentes grupos socioculturales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Los hábitats (dónde vivimos), los hábitos (cómo vivimos) y los habitantes (quiénes somos) constituyen una unidad ética a la vez que ecosistémica. Sin embargo, los hábitats son usualmente estudiados por ecólogos, en cambio, los hábitos por filósofos y otras disciplinas sociales. Con el fin de superar esta disociación, iniciamos un programa transdisciplinario de campo coordinado por ecólogos y filósofos ambientales, que ensaya una visión más integral de los habitantes embebidos en sus hábitats y hábitos en la ecorregión subantártica de Sudamérica. La biosfera puede ser concebida como un reticulado mosaico de unidades hábitats-hábitos-habitantes, donde los humanos han co-evolucionado con sus lenguas indígenas, sus prácticas y conocimientos ecológicos. Este mosaico está siendo hoy destruido por la imposición de un único modelo económico-cultural globalizado. Un segundo objetivo de nuestro programa transdisciplinario es contribuir a la conservación de la diversidad bio-cultural, especialmente en la ecorregión subantártica. En Cabo de Hornos, en el extremo sur de América, encontramos que los educadores, las autoridades y los tomadores de decisiones conocen poco acerca de los hábitats, las lenguas y la flora nativa. En contraste, los miembros de la Comunidad Indígena Yagán y los residentes antiguos poseen un conocimiento detallado acerca de la diversidad biológica y cultural nativa; sin embargo, ellos participan poco en la toma de decisiones y en el sistema de educación formal. Para ayudar a superar esta disociación entre los hábitats- hábitos-habitantes de Cabo de Hornos y aquellos promovidos por la "sociedad global", en 1999 comenzamos el programa de educación, investigación y conservación biocultural del Parque Etnobotánico Omora que involucra tres etapas críticas: (1) descubrimiento de la diversidad biocultural con una aproximación de "filtro fino" que permite la detección de niveles de diversidad cultural y biológica usualmente omitidos por conceptos generales universalizantes, tales como amerindio versus eurocéntrico o conocimiento ecológico local versus global; (2) encuentros directos "cara a cara" con los co-habitantes humanos y no- humanos en sus hábitats nativos, a través de los cuales la diversidad biocultural deja de ser sólo un concepto o indicador numérico y comienza a ser una experiencia de co-habitación; y (3) actividades de educación y conservación. Estos pasos han sido implementados a escala local, regional e internacional a través de la creación de la Reserva de Biosfera Cabo de Hornos, nominada por UNESCO el 2005, y el establecimiento del Programa de Conservación Biocultural Subantártica, coordinado por la Universidad de Magallanes, el Instituto de Ecología y Biodiversidad de Chile y la University of North Texas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Environmental Ethics is the property of Philosophy Documentation Center and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses various reports published within the issue, including one by Baird Callicott on the concept of wilderness, and another by Christopher Anderson and collaborators on the international concept of Long-Term Socio-Ecological Research (LTSER) and pertinent knowledge by Robert Frodeman.

The article discusses the inter-regional dialogues addressing these challenges, Environmental Ethics has published special issues with works by authors from different continents, cultures, and traditions of thought. It mentions that this current special issue presents two emblematic cases of thinkers and activists from the northern hemisphere, and the complexities involved in their collaborative work with societies in South America.

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses articles in the issue on the topics including socio-environmental justice and cultivate respect for the diversity of living beings; and collaboration among environmental philosophers to address pressing socio-environmental challenges.

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses various articles within the issue on topics including environmental philosophy, environmental policies and economic-social challenges coming in environmental ethics.

A eulogy for Colombian philosopher Carlos Augusto Angel Maya is presented.