Fixism and conservation science

Abstract

The field of biodiversity conservation has recently been criticized as relying on a fixist view of the living world in which existing species constitute at the same time targets of conservation efforts and static states of reference, which is in apparent disagreement with evolutionary dynamics. We reviewed the prominent role of species as conservation units and the common benchmark approach to conservation that aims to use past biodiversity as a reference to conserve current biodiversity. We found that the species approach is justified by the discrepancy between the time scales of macroevolution and human influence and that biodiversity benchmarks are based on reference processes rather than fixed reference states. Overall, we argue that the ethical and theoretical frameworks underlying conservation research are based on macroevolutionary processes, such as extinction dynamics. Current species, phylogenetic, community, and functional conservation approaches constitute short-term responses to short-term human effects on these reference processes, and these approaches are consistent with evolutionary principles.

Artificial Aquatic Ecosystems

“…Certainly, when transforming, altering, or removing a functional natural aquatic ecosystem, one should expect a reduction in current ecosystem services provisioning, unless or until scientific study confirms a better outcome possible from the change. One important constraint on artificial aquatic systems is that with their anthropogenic origin comes a severely shortened evolutionary, ecological, and geophysical history [72,73]. To the extent that diversity and other aspects of ecosystem structure depend on slow processes of physical change and community assembly, the recent origin of most artificial systems will likely limit their function.…”

A full and authentic reckoning of species’ ranges for conservation: response to Akçakaya et al. 2018

“…Similarly, Robert et al. () suggest conservationists avoid “fixisim” by focusing on macroevolutionary processes, rather than reference states.…”

“…This dynamism has led some critics to argue that reference states or benchmarks for conservation make no sense; they represent an impractical nostalgia for "the world as it once was" and can never be again (e.g., Kareiva & Marvier 2012). Similarly, Robert et al (2017) suggest conservationists avoid "fixisim" by focusing on macroevolutionary processes, rather than reference states.…”

Impact of Geography on Adaptation for the Future Sustainability of Human Society on Earth

“…Today, human societies have adapted to the environment by conserving biodiversity and protecting species from extinction (Almond et al, 2020;Gavin et al, 2018;Robert et al, 2017). Attempts at reducing biodiversity loss have led to several measures including the development of National Biodiversity Strategies and Action plan by the 193 CBD members and convening of international environmental meetings and writings on international biodiversity-related reports and accords that set biodiversity targets (CBD, 2010;Gavin et al, 2018;Stolton, 2010).…”