In what was probably the best orchestrated and publicly cohesive reforestation event in world history, the people of South Korea came together in the 1970s and 1980s and reforested their country after it had been denuded during thirty-fi ve years of Japanese colonization and the subsequent Korean War. Reforestation was needed at the time primarily for developing a domestic timber supply to support its largely rural and agrarian economy. But South Korea has changed. It is now one of the world's most densely populated countries with a rapidly increasing industrial economy, and more than half its population is urban. It is no longer clear that providing a domestic timber supply is either desirable or feasible. In this article, we argue that providing recreational opportunities, especially for urbanites, and ecological restoration for biodiversity conservation are now the best strategic uses of Korea's forests. SUMMARYLe dilemme forestier de la Corée du Sud K. TAK, Y. CHUN et P.M. WOOD La population de la Corée du Sud s'est réunie dans les années 70 et les années 80 dans ce qui a été sans doute l'évènement de reboisement le mieux orchestré et le plus cohésif publiquement dans l'histoire mondiale, et a reboisé le pays après qu'il ait été dénudé durant les trente cinq ans de colonisation japonaise et la guerre de Corée qui s'ensuivit. Le reboisement était nécessaire à l'époque, principalement pour développer une production de bois domestique pour supporter l'économie du pays,alors largement rurale et agraire. Mais la Corée du Sud a changé. Elle est maintenant l'un des pays aux plus fortes densités de population et possède une économie industrielle à croissance rapide. Plus de la moitié de sa population est urbaine. Il n'est plus certain maintenant que l'obtention d'une production de bois domestique soit faisable, voire désirable. Dans cet article, nous avançons que la meilleure utilisation stratégique actuelle des forêts de Corée est d'offrir des opportunités de récréation, particulièrement pour les populations urbaines, et la restoration écologique pour la conservation de la biodiversité. El dilema forestal de Corea del SurK. TAK, Y. CHUN, y P.M. WOOD En lo que ha sido probablemente el caso de reforestación basada en la organización pública conjunta más notable de la historia mundial, el pueblo de Corea del Sur se unió en los años 70 y 80 para reforestar su país, después de su deforestación durante los treinta y cinco años de colonización japonesa y la guerra de Corea posterior. En esta época se necesitaba un proceso de reforestación sobre todo para el desarrollo de reservas nacionales de madera adecuadas para su economía en gran parte rural y agraria. Pero Corea del Sur ha experimentado cambios profundos; ahora es uno de los países más densamente poblados del mundo, con una economía industrial en rápido desarrollo, y la mayor parte de la población vive en zonas urbanas. Ya no está tan claro que la existencia de reservas nacionales de madera sea ni deseable ni factible. En este artículo, se postula que en la actualida...

The value of biodiversity is usually confused with the value of biological resources, both actual and potential. A sharp distinction between biological resources and biodiversity offers a clearer insight into the value of biodiversity itself and therefore the need to preserve it. Biodiversity can be defined abstractly as the differences among biological entities. Using this definition, biodiversity can be seen more appropriately as: (a) a necessary precondition for the long term maintenance of biological resources, and therefore, (b) an essential environmental condition. Three values of biodiversity are identified and arranged in a hierarchy: (1) the self-augmenting phenomenon of biodiversity maintains (2) the conditions necessary for the adaptive evolution of species and higher taxa, which in turn is necessary for providing humans with (3) a range of biological resources in the long term. Two broad policy implications emerge: increments of biodiversity should not be traded off against biological resources as if they were the same, and the conservation of biodiversity should be a constraint on the public interest, not a goal in service of the public interest.

No abstract

No abstract

Limnetic‐benthic sympatric species pairs of threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus spp.) are unique to lakes of southwestern British Columbia. One pair has gone extinct and the remaining three pairs are listed as endangered. The biodiversity conservation policies that could potentially protect these species are examined. The plight of the stickleback pairs serves as a test of the sufficiency of Canada's constellation of biodiversity conservation policies. This article finds that until very recently not even the combination of national and provincial policies offered unequivocal protection for these species. A new national Species at Risk Act now offers more promise. Nevertheless, a more fundamental issue remains. A misconception concerning the value of biodiversity may be impeding the formulation of adequate policies and plans for biodiversity conservation in general, both in Canada and worldwide.