Finally back in print, here is the 30th anniversary edition of The Tree—the renowned English novelist John Fowles’s (The Magus, The French Lieutenant’s Woman) moving meditation on the connection between the natural world and human creativity. An inspiring modern ecological classic, The Tree is both a powerful argument against taming the wild and a major author’s inspiring and beautifully written defense of “the joys of getting lost,” and of spontaneity in life and art.
Zotero Collections:
Modern lifestyles disconnect people from nature, and this may have adverse consequences for the well-being of both humans and the environment. In two experiments, we found that although outdoor walks in nearby nature made participants much happier than indoor walks did, participants made affective forecasting errors, such that they systematically underestimated nature’s hedonic benefit. The pleasant moods experienced on outdoor nature walks facilitated a subjective sense of connection with nature, a construct strongly linked with concern for the environment and environmentally sustainable behavior. To the extent that affective forecasts determine choices, our findings suggest that people fail to maximize their time in nearby nature and thus miss opportunities to increase their happiness and relatedness to nature. Our findings suggest a happy path to sustainability, whereby contact with nature fosters individual happiness and environmentally responsible behavior.
<p>The article summarizes trends in fertility over the period 1960-1995 for major developing regions and reviews of developing country demographic trends since 1960 which demonstrates that fertility decline has occurred in a wide range of economic, social, and cultural circumstances and that it will probably become universal in the near future. It is argued that the huge gains in life expectancy that occurred in the twentieth century constitute the most plausible underlying cause of the near ubiquitous falls in fertility. However, explanations of the precise timing and speed of national fertility transitions need to take into account many other factors.</p>
Zotero Collections:
Zotero Collections:
We evaluate the boundary of the Anthropocene geological time interval as an epoch, since it is useful to have a consistent temporal definition for this increasingly used unit, whether the presently informal term is eventually formalized or not. Of the three main levels suggested – an ‘early Anthropocene’ level some thousands of years ago; the beginning of the Industrial Revolution at ∼1800 CE (Common Era); and the ‘Great Acceleration’ of the mid-twentieth century – current evidence suggests that the last of these has the most pronounced and globally synchronous signal. A boundary at this time need not have a Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP or ‘golden spike’) but can be defined by a Global Standard Stratigraphic Age (GSSA), i.e. a point in time of the human calendar. We propose an appropriate boundary level here to be the time of the world's first nuclear bomb explosion, on July 16th 1945 at Alamogordo, New Mexico; additional bombs were detonated at the average rate of one every 9.6 days until 1988 with attendant worldwide fallout easily identifiable in the chemostratigraphic record. Hence, Anthropocene deposits would be those that may include the globally distributed primary artificial radionuclide signal, while also being recognized using a wide range of other stratigraphic criteria. This suggestion for the Holocene–Anthropocene boundary may ultimately be superseded, as the Anthropocene is only in its early phases, but it should remain practical and effective for use by at least the current generation of scientists.
One of the most important goals and outcomes of social life is to attain status in the groups to which we belong. Such face-to-face status is defined by the amount of respect, influence, and prominence each member enjoys in the eyes of the others. Three studies investigated personological determinants of status in social groups (fraternity, sorority, and dormitory), relating the Big Five personality traits and physical attractiveness to peer ratings of status. High Extraversion substantially predicted elevated status for both sexes. High Neuroticism, incompatible with male gender norms, predicted lower status in men. None of the other Big Five traits predicted status. These effects were independent of attractiveness, which predicted higher status only in men. Contrary to previous claims, women's status ordering was just as stable as men's but emerged later. Discussion focuses on personological pathways to attaining status and on potential mediators.
Zotero Collections:
We address the explicit ecocentric roots of conservation science and the support of a growing number of conservationists for ecocentric natural value. Although ecosystem‐services arguments may play an important role in stemming the biodiversity crisis, a true transformation of humanity's relationship with nature ought to be based in part on ecocentric valuation. Conservation scientists have played a leading role in initiating this transformation, and they ought to continue to do so.Since its inception in 1985, the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) has grown from a few hundred mainly North American members to over 5000 members in sections and chapters around the globe. The success of SCB is a truly positive development for biodiversity conservation; but as with any rapid expansion there can be growing pains. One recent example is the revival of the long‐standing debate over whether nature ought to be protected for its instrumental (anthropocentric) versus its intrinsic (nonanthropocentic or ecocentric) value (e.g., Soulé 2013; Kareiva 2014). The debate has intensified over the past few years, resulting in calls for inclusive conservation (Tallis et al. 2014) and new forms of valuation such as relational values (Chan et al. 2016). Many authors contend, however, that recognition of intrinsic natural value is a cornerstone of conservation (Vucetich et al. 2015; Batavia & Nelson 2017; Piccolo 2017) and the broader concept of sustainability (Washington et al. 2017a). Some of the leading founders of SCB, including Soulé (1985), Ehrenfeld (1978), and Noss (1996), explicitly expressed notions of intrinsic natural value, and today SCB (2017) still maintains, as its first organizational value, “[t]here is intrinsic value in the natural diversity of organisms, the complexity of ecological systems, and the resilience created by evolutionary processes.” Thus, the debate over the role of intrinsic value is more than an academic exercise. Given the seriousness of the biodiversity crisis (Steffen et al. 2015; Ceballos et al. 2017) and the key role SCB could play in helping create public awareness of this crisis, the direction we take now will likely have far‐reaching implications for the future of the biosphere.
The debate about why we ought to protect nature is much older than the field of conservation science. The oft‐cited rift between utilitarian Gifford Pinchot and preservationist John Muir in the early 20th century is perhaps the most well‐known example. They began in agreement over the establishment of large forest reserves in the United States but developed irreconcilable differences over whether the forests were mainly for timber harvest or wilderness preservation. Leopold (1949) recognized this distinction in “The Land Ethic,” wherein he perceived an “A‐B cleavage” within the disciplines of forestry, wildlife management, and agriculture. He noted that within each discipline some focused on utilitarian values (A), whereas others took a more nonutilitarian viewpoint (B), or in contemporary terms an ecocentric viewpoint (Callicott 2013). Leopold conceived his land ethic from this ecocentric perspective, and it is the basis for the modern eco‐evolutionary conservation ethic that recognizes intrinsic natural value (Rolston 2012; Callicott 2013). Although by 1985 environmental philosophers had developed formal arguments both for and against (Norton 2005) intrinsic natural value, SCB's founders explicitly included intrinsic value within the normative postulates of the organization (Soulé 1985). A shift toward a focus on anthropocentric valuation, therefore, would require a major reevaluation of conservation science's organizational values–is the field prepared for such a shift?
Perhaps proposing such a shift is not unexpected, given the popularization of the concept of ecosystem services. We are now said to live in own self‐styled geologic epoch, the Anthropocene (but see Callicott 2015; Rolston 2017). As often formulated, ecosystem services are based explicitly on anthropocentric valuation (i.e., services delivered to humans) (MEA 2005). Ecosystem services are appealing because they can be perceived as putting nature on an equal footing with business. For example, the monetary value of forests for carbon sequestration can be estimated or offsets can be proposed for biodiversity losses due to habitat destruction (but see, e.g., Spash 2015). Although there has been much discussion about how to put tangible values on ecosystem services, there are a growing number of conservationists who fear such anthropocentric valuation undermines the long‐term success of conservation (Washington et al. 2017a, 2017b). Conservation science has been a leading voice for the scientific rationale for preserving Earth's biodiversity, and many important international agreements have been reached on the establishment of protected areas (CBD 2017). Shall conservation scientists now wager that we stand a better chance of success if we shift our core values from protecting biodiversity in part for its own sake toward protecting it for the services it provides to humans? Worth noting is Ehrlich and Mooney's (1983) early formulation of ecosystem services:
“…we agree with Ehrenfeld (1978) that there are compelling reasons for preserving the biotic diversity of Earth regardless of any present or future discoveries made about the benefits people may receive from other organisms.”
Recent arguments that conservation ethics can be context dependent (Tallis et al. 2014) or are relational (Chan et al. 2016) have practical value. In the short term, all effective means must be employed to conserve biodiversity and prevent the collapse of ecosystem function. But the notion that anthropocentric valuation serves as a foundation for nature conservation or that ecocentric valuation is part of a dichotomy that may be included (or not), falls short of providing a lasting rationale for conserving Earth's biodiversity. Where would we be today if similar arguments had won out in 1948 when the UN was framing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Have ethical humans ever truly considered that other humans be protected for the services they provide while awaiting recognition of their universal rights? Can an honest rationale for equality be built on such inclusive or relational valuation theory? In the 30 years since SCB was founded, a generation of philosophers has developed a sound ecoevolutionary rationale for ecocentric valuation (Rolston 1975, 2012; Callicott 2013), one that formally recognizes that “…a land ethic changes the role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land‐community to plain member and citizen of it” (Leopold 1949). Such ecocentric valuation places humans within the sphere of values shared by all life, intrinsic, relational, and instrumental (Piccolo 2017). Importantly, such values can be assigned to collectives (Callicott 2016) as well as to individual beings, providing a sound rational for species and ecosystem protection (Rolston 1985, 2012). Ecocentrism recognizes that although humans may be the only species capable of deep moral reflection, we are not the sole focus of moral worth (Curry 2011; Vetlesen 2015). A truly inclusive and lasting rationale for biodiversity conservation ought to maintain the recognition of the intrinsic value of human and nonhuman beings, species, and ecosystems. This entails on us the duty to protect biodiversity for its own sake as well as for ours—we ought to conserve biodiversity not only because it is right for us, but simply because it is right.
As with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, humanity may be transforming its worldview toward recognition of ecocentric value and the rights of nature. Bolivia's Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth is a well‐known example (http://therightsofnature.org). The UN has been slow to formally recognize ecocentric value (Washington et al. 2017a), but this may be changing; the UN Harmony with Nature Initiative explicitly expresses ecocentric values (Maloney 2017). Although we are a long way from universal acceptance of ecocentric valuation, we believe now is the time for conservation scientists to reaffrim their commitment to intrinsic natural value.
Transformation requires leadership. By unequivocally reaffirming its first organizational value, the SCB can help lead the transition to true sustainability, wherein the well‐being of all inhabitants of the biosphere, human and nonhuman alike, is considered. That which constitutes a good life for those of one species ought not to compromise the good lives of those of other species with which we share the planet. Over 600 scientists, scholars, conservationists, and citizens, among them some of the founders of the field of conservation, have recently added their signatures to a Statement of Commitment to Ecocentrism (Washington et al. 2017b). This is a hopeful sign that conservation scientists will continue to play a leading role in efforts to sustain Earth's wondrous biodiversity. We urge conservation professionals worldwide and SCB members in particular to think deeply about why we ought to conserve it.
Ecocentrism is the broadest term for worldviews that recognize intrinsic value in all lifeformsand ecosystems themselves, including their abiotic components. Anthropocentrism, in
contrast, values other lifeforms and ecosystems insofar as they are valuable for human
well-being, preferences and interests. Herein, the authors examine the roots of ecocentrism
and discuss its mixed history of international recognition. They argue that non-human
nature has intrinsic value irrespective of human preferences or valuation, and they refute
the claim that ecocentrism is misanthropic. They then summarize four key examples from
the academic literature in which anthropocentrism fails to provide an ethic adequate for
respecting and protecting planet Earth and its inhabitants. The authors conclude that
ecocentrism is essential for solving our unprecedented environmental crisis, arguing its
importance from four perspectives: ethical, evolutionary, spiritual and ecological. They
contend that a social transformation towards ecocentrism is not only an ethical but a
practical imperative, and they urge support for ecocentric understanding and practices.
Whether referring to a place, a nonhuman animal or plant, or a state of mind, wild indicates autonomy and agency, a will to be, a unique expression of life. Yet two contrasting ideas about wild nature permeate contemporary discussions: either that nature is most wild in the absence of a defiling human presence, or that nature is completely humanized and nothing is truly wild. This book charts a different path. Exploring how people can become attuned to the wild community of life and also contribute to the well-being of the wild places in which we live, work, and play, 'Wildness' brings together esteemed authors from a variety of landscapes, cultures, and backgrounds to share their stories about the interdependence of everyday human lifeways and wildness.; Target Audience: Specialized
Since 2009, the Working Group on the ‘Anthropocene’ (or, commonly, AWG for Anthropocene Working Group), has been critically analysing the case for formalization of this proposed but still informal geological time unit. The study to date has mainly involved establishing the overall nature of the Anthropocene as a potential chronostratigraphic/geochronologic unit, and exploring the stratigraphic proxies, including several that are novel in geology, that might be applied to its characterization and definition. A preliminary summary of evidence and interim recommendations was presented by the Working Group at the 35th International Geological Congress in Cape Town, South Africa, in August 2016, together with results of voting by members of the AWG indicating the current balance of opinion on major questions surrounding the Anthropocene. The majority opinion within the AWG holds the Anthropocene to be stratigraphically real, and recommends formalization at epoch/series rank based on a mid-20th century boundary. Work is proceeding towards a formal proposal based upon selection of an appropriate Global boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP), as well as auxiliary stratotypes. Among the array of proxies that might be used as a primary marker, anthropogenic radionuclides associated with nuclear arms testing are the most promising; potential secondary markers include plastic, carbon isotope patterns and industrial fly ash. All these proxies have excellent global or near-global correlation potential in a wide variety of sedimentary bodies, both marine and non-marine.
Yoga is being used by a growing number of youth and adults as a means of improving overall health and fitness. There is also a progressive trend toward use of yoga as a mind-body complementary and alternative medicine intervention to improve specific physical and mental health conditions. To provide clinicians with therapeutically useful information about yoga, the evidence evaluating yoga as an effective intervention for children and adolescents with health problems is reviewed and summarized. A brief overview of yoga and yoga therapy is presented along with yoga resources and practical strategies for clinical practitioners to use with their patients. The majority of available studies with children and adolescents suggest benefits to using yoga as a therapeutic intervention and show very few adverse effects. These results must be interpreted as preliminary findings because many of the studies have methodological limitations that prevent strong conclusions from being drawn. Yoga appears promising as a complementary therapy for children and adolescents. Further information about how to apply it most effectively and more coordinated research efforts are needed.
Zotero Collections:
Here’s a revised and updated edition of the most readable book on depression. Folks who are feeling really depressed often don’t feel much like reading, but You Can Beat Depressionis a very reader-friendly self-help guide. This important resource has been recognized by the National Institute of Mental Health D/ART program and the National Mental Health Association. Readers will find all-new information on bipolar disorder diagnosis and treatment, along with helpful material on prevention of depression, prevention of relapse after treatment, brief therapy interventions, exercise and other non-medical approaches, the Prozac controversy, and much more. Includes an up-to-date consumer guide to medications. Its comprehensive approach to self-assessment carefully guides readers to figure out when and how they can help themselves, when they need to seek professional treatment, and what to expect along the way.
Here’s a revised and updated edition of the most readable book on depression. Folks who are feeling really depressed often don’t feel much like reading, but You Can Beat Depressionis a very reader-friendly self-help guide. This important resource has been recognized by the National Institute of Mental Health D/ART program and the National Mental Health Association. Readers will find all-new information on bipolar disorder diagnosis and treatment, along with helpful material on prevention of depression, prevention of relapse after treatment, brief therapy interventions, exercise and other non-medical approaches, the Prozac controversy, and much more. Includes an up-to-date consumer guide to medications. Its comprehensive approach to self-assessment carefully guides readers to figure out when and how they can help themselves, when they need to seek professional treatment, and what to expect along the way.
"Developing Social and Emotional Wellbeing in Children provides a practical guide full of proven strategies for promoting social and emotional learning (SEL) skills in children aged 4-16. A practical guide designed to support parents and education professionals in developing social and emotional skills in children, a form of learning that can be neglected in formal education Demonstrates how to foster social and emotional learning (SEL) at home and in the classroom, and shows how parents and professionals can work together for success Includes a wealth of exercises for promoting social and emotional wellbeing, along with tips, tools, and coverage of new developments such as computer-assisted instruction Written by authors with a wealth of practical and writing experience"--
"Developing Social and Emotional Wellbeing in Children provides a practical guide full of proven strategies for promoting social and emotional learning (SEL) skills in children aged 4-16. A practical guide designed to support parents and education professionals in developing social and emotional skills in children, a form of learning that can be neglected in formal education Demonstrates how to foster social and emotional learning (SEL) at home and in the classroom, and shows how parents and professionals can work together for success Includes a wealth of exercises for promoting social and emotional wellbeing, along with tips, tools, and coverage of new developments such as computer-assisted instruction Written by authors with a wealth of practical and writing experience "--
Pages |