Finding Common Ground in Biological Conservation: Beyond the Anthropocentric vs. Biocentric Controversy

A generalized demand for public decision processes to be open, integrative, and adaptive is increasingly evident in the environmental debate. In biological conservation, however, as in most other environmental controversies, we continue to find that our basic nature (evolutionary and cultural) generally predisposes us to exclude and confront one another in words or deeds, sometimes violently. In this essay we look at how differences in perspectives, how we deal with differences in perspectives, and how we deal with each other as people may work against broad democratic participation and the search for common ground. We argue that widely-invoked dichotomous classifications of perspectives such as the “anthropocentric vs. biocentric” characterization can be an obstacle to finding the common ground, because they tend to be rigid, exclusive, and confrontational in nature. The conditioning factors which underlie the habitual use of such characterizations include the “we vs. they” phenomenon, the age old debate pertaining to the relationship of humans with the rest of the world, and overly simplistic views of self and others. As an alternative, we suggest the use of more open, flexible, and constructive approaches that account for differences in people’s perspectives. We provide an example of such an approach based on people’s identities, expectations, and demands, and we encourage the exploration of better ways to find common ground for environmental sustainability. Making a decision about biological conservation is no different than the policymaking process in any other arena. It is a process of human interaction wherein people try to clarify and secure their common interest. People may succeed or fail for a variety of reasons, not the least of which are differences in perspectives, how we deal with them, and how we deal with each other as people. This paper examines the concept of diverse perspectives as it relates to a commonly debated issue in conservation—the anthropocentric vs. biocentric controversy. PERSPECTIVES AS OBSTACLES TO FINDING COMMON GROUND DIVERSE PERSPECTIVES AND DICHOTOMOUS CLASSIFICATIONS People’s perspectives are made up of their identities (i.e., who or what they identify with), expectations (i.e., set of expected outcomes), and demands (i.e., patterns of claim-making) (Lasswell and McDougal 1992). People with perspectives of like kind tend to gravitate toward one another and develop a common, mutually reinforcing cultural outlook, based on similar core beliefs (also called a paradigm, doctrine, framework, outlook, myth, or ideology). Gravitating towards one another, however, does not necessarily result in a loss People with perspectives of like kind tend to gravitate toward one another and develop a common, mutually reinforcing cultural outlook, based on similar core beliefs (also called a paradigm, doctrine, framework, outlook, myth, or ideology).