Leandro de SantAnna Knorre, #49301120

The midway: human dimensions approach to natural conservation matters.

I consider the human dimensions approach to be ideal when it comes to conservation policies,
as it can be a common denominator among many different perspectives. It is a less difficult
way in which extreme understandings on how to relate with the environment for instance, a
biocentric perspective, when opposing to a short-term centered economic perspective can
agree on certain common points found in an anthropocentric approach.
That bias has its centre on the needs and aspirations of the humankind in order to decide,
when regarding to conservation subjects, the better way to relate with the natural
environment. Therefore, it shall consider many diverse aspects on how to use natural
resources so that it is possible to benefit both the present and future generations without
harming the ecosystems more than necessary or, even better, not harming them at all.
Therefore, human dimension in ecosystem management has been conceptualized by the
National Human Dimensions Task Group (USDA Forest Service) as an integral component
of Ecosystem Management recognizing that people are part of ecosystems, that peoples
pursuits of past, present, and future desires, needs and values (including perceptions, beliefs,
values, and behaviors) have and will continue to influence ecosystems, and that ecosystem
management must include consideration of the physical, emotional, mental, spiritual, social,
cultural and economic well-being of people and communities (Cordell et al., 1999).
The development of the human dimensions perspective, as shown by Cordell et al. (1999) has
led to four main principles:
1) Humans and ecosystems interact and even are mutually dependant. Even more
important while the population grows as quickly as in the past millennia, we should
take this fact into account in decision-making processes.

The midway: human dimensions approach to natural conservation matters.

2) Ecosystems are naturally complex and consequently their management can be very
intricate. Especially true when adding human factors to the ecosystems which were
already complex and hard to predict, even when untouched.
3) Time and spatial scales may influence the way to manage ecosystems.
4) Human conscious interactions can lead to a sustainable management of ecosystems.
Human dimensions may allow the economic viability in determined areas, in opposition to a
more extreme biocentric approach. However, sometimes the social tension arose from the
opposition of economic interests versus conservation for instance, of endangered depletable
resources - cannot be avoided, as the better solution from a long term perspective can be
letting the natural processes take their own courses with the minimum interference possible.
An extremely greedy perspective is either not desirable, not only to the environment, but to
the human species as well, because it could lead to the exhaustion of resources,
compromising the well being of future generations. That is why it is so necessary to take into
consideration the value of internalities and externalities involved in the productive cycles,
even those that are not currently valuated, as in Knowler & Dust (2008) and Ward (2006).
Some services rendered by forests and usually not taken into account are the provision of
clean air and water and the absorption of carbon dioxide.
An equilibrated approach to conservation that takes into account the human dimensions in all
its relevant aforementioned aspects is the most neutral way to conciliate the diverse interests
that people can have in natural resources. To reach the aimed social peace, conciliating the
different interests, is a challenge of our time in many areas, remarkably in conservation, an
area in which equilibrating natural resources rational exploitation and the health of the
ecosystems is so relevant. However, it is indispensable in order to generate wealth and to
respect both the humankind and the nature, as a whole.

The midway: human dimensions approach to natural conservation matters.

References
Cordell, H. K., A. P. Hoover, G. R. Super, & C. H. Manning. (1999). Adding human
dimensions to ecosystem-based management of natural resources. In H.K. Cordell &
J.C. Bergstrom (Eds.), Integrating Social Sciences with Ecosystem Management:
Human dimensions in assessment, policy, and management (pp. 1-12). Champaign,
IL: Sagamore Publishing.
Knowler, D., & K. Dust. (2008). Dollars and Sense: The Economic Rationale to Protect
Spotted Owl Habitat in British Columbia. Vancouver BC: David Suzuki Foundation,
EcoJustice, and the Western Canada Wilderness Committee. Retrieved from
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/publications/downloads/2008/Knowler-Dust.pdf.
Leopold, A. (2003). The land ethic. In D. VanDeVeer & C. Pierce (Eds.), The Environmental
Ethics & Policy Book (3rd ed. pp. 215-224). Toronto ON: Wadsworth Publishing.
Ward, F. A. (2006). Economic thinking. In Environmental and Natural Resource Economics
(pp. 14-34). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.