Ethical pluralism, pragmatism, and sustainability in conservation practice

Conservation organizations are asked to be responsive to a number of ethical obligations beyond that of the conservation of biodiversity: the reduction of poverty, the imperative of social justice and cultural integrity, and the improvement in human livelihoods. Yet how a conservation project is designed and structured can negatively impact people’s access to resources, privilege one group of people over another, or protect some species at a cost to others. Ideological conflict among nature protectionists, advocates for indigenous people, those promoting a pro-poor agenda, and those seeking to move conservation into the economic mainstream has characterized the conservation debate. I argue that in practice, most conservation programs should adopt a pluralistic and pragmatic approach, adopting multiple goals and making decisions on the basis of what works. Choosing among approaches requires an appreciation of trade-offs, and consideration of biological, social, and cultural values. Ultimately conservation approaches must be sustainable – ecologically, culturally, socially, economically and politically – otherwise they will fail both practically and ethically.