Lean Christopher H
Department of Philosophy, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
ARC Centre of Excellence in Synthetic Biology, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Camb Prism Extinct. 2025 Jun 13;3:e10. doi: 10.1017/ext.2025.10002. eCollection 2025.
Ecosystems are increasingly being represented as marketplaces that produce goods for humanity, and because of this, economic metaphors for increasing efficiency have been introduced into conservation. A powerful model for economic growth is the globalised free market, and some are implicitly deploying it to suggest changes in conservation practice. Ecological globalisation is the position that we should not control the free movement of species and rewilding occurs most efficiently through non-intervention. When species can move and interact with new ecological systems, they create novel ecosystems. These novel arrangements create experimental markets in nature's economy, providing opportunities for the efficient production of goods for humans, also known as ecosystem services. When invasive species supersede local populations, it indicates previous biotic systems were inefficient, which is why they were replaced, and therefore, it is wrong to protect indigenous "losers" from extinction. Those who defend indigenous species are accused of being xenophobic against recent biotic migrants. This position is flawed both empirically and morally as there is a disconnect between these economic and political arguments when applied to human economies and nature's economy.
生态系统越来越多地被视为为人类生产商品的市场，因此，提高效率的经济隐喻已被引入保护领域。经济增长的一个强大模式是全球化自由市场，一些人正在暗中运用它来建议保护实践的变革。生态全球化的观点是，我们不应控制物种的自由流动，通过不干预的方式进行野化最为有效。当物种能够迁移并与新的生态系统相互作用时，它们会创造出新的生态系统。这些新的组合在自然经济中创造了试验性市场，为人类高效生产商品提供了机会，也就是所谓的生态系统服务。当入侵物种取代本地种群时，这表明之前的生物系统效率低下，这就是它们被取代的原因，因此，保护本土“失败者”免于灭绝是错误的。那些捍卫本土物种的人被指责对近期的生物迁移者抱有排外情绪。这种观点在经验和道德上都存在缺陷，因为当这些经济和政治论点应用于人类经济和自然经济时存在脱节。
