Individual Species Management: Threatened Taxa and Invasive Species

Simberloff, Daniel

doi:10.1002/9780470692400.ch26

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Perspective corresponds to whether the focus is the perception of a landscape by a single taxon [28] or a human perspective of a landscape for multiple species [29]. Specifying the focus of work is important because research approaches and impact mitigation strategies derived for one species might not be suitable for other species [30]; likewise, approaches that target broad assemblages might not be suitable for a given species of interest. Several debates have been fuelled, in part, by confusion over perspective and the level of biological organization in question.…”

Section: Biological Organization and Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Tackling the habitat fragmentation panchreston

Lindenmayer

Fischer

2007

Trends in Ecology & Evolution

272

202

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term 'habitat fragmentation' is often used inconsistently and as a broad umbrella for many patterns and processes that accompany landscape change. This has made it a panchreston or an explanation or theory used in such a variety of ways as to become meaningless. The panchreston problem has hampered efforts to understand and mitigate the negative impacts of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity, and has contributed to several largely unproductive debates. To overcome the panchreston problem, we suggest that the focus of future work needs to be specified more clearly within several key themes that comprise the broad domain of habitat fragmentation. Here, we outline three of these key themes and provide unambiguous terminology to help overcome the panchreston problem.

show abstract

Section: Biological Organization and Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Tackling the habitat fragmentation panchreston

Lindenmayer

Fischer

2007

Trends in Ecology & Evolution

272

202

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The morals of model-making

Sterrett

2014

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I address questions about values in model-making in engineering, specifically: Might the role of values be attributable solely to interests involved in specifying and using the model? Selected examples illustrate the surprisingly wide variety of things one must take into account in the model-making itself. The notions of system (as used in engineering thermodynamics), and physically similar systems (as used in the physical sciences) are important and powerful in determining what is relevant to an engineering model. Another example (windfarms) illustrates how an idea to completely re-characterize, or reframe, an engineering problem arose during model-making. I employ a qualitative analogue of the notion of physically similar systems. Historical cases can thus be drawn upon; I illustrate with a comparison between a geoengineering proposal to inject, or spray, sulfate aerosols, and two different historical cases involving the spraying of DDT (fire ant eradication; malaria eradication). The current geoengineering proposal is seen to be like the disastrous and counterproductive case, and unlike the successful case, of the spraying of DDT. I conclude by explaining my view that model-making in science is analogous to moral perception in action, drawing on a view in moral theory that has come to be called moral particularism.

show abstract

Individual Species Management: Threatened Taxa and Invasive Species

Cited by 2 publications

References 29 publications

Tackling the habitat fragmentation panchreston

Tackling the habitat fragmentation panchreston

The morals of model-making

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About