Abstract
In this chapter, Glenn Deliège tracks the paradoxical role that “nature” plays as an evaluative criterion in New World restoration practices. On first sight “nature”, understood as “that what has not been manipulated by human hand”, can no longer play any meaningful role in Old World conservation, as the landscapes of the Old World are all “humanly mediated”. Yet, Deliège demonstrates that “nature” does still play a role as an evaluative criterion. Through a critique of Eric Katz’s work on restoration, Deliège argues that when “nature” is evoked as a criterion, it does not refer to “nature” as an ontological category (of things “not manipulated by human hand”) but to a rejection of the (complete) instrumentalization of what one is aiming to restore. As such, the restorative act is not primarily an act of manipulation, but of interpretation: how to do justice to that what one aims to restore. Yet because the meaning of nature is always embodied in concrete material forms, it is subject to transformations over which we have no ultimate control. Both nature restoration and preservation therefore have to endure the tension between keeping the meaning nature has present through manipulation, and recognizing that such manipulation can destroy what it sought to conserve or presence in the first place.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In many places, North-American landscapes seem to be as historically layered as European ones, yet this fact had until recently scarcely been recognized, let alone incorporated into conservation practice (see, for instance, Nabhan 1995).
- 2.
I will use the term “nature conservation” as a general term encompassing both nature “restoration” and “preservation”. Whether there is actually a sharp distinction between “restoration” and “preservation” is discussed later in this chapter. For now, it is important to note that I use “conservation” as a general term to encompass both nature preservation and restoration, thereby deviating a little form the common use of the term.
- 3.
For an excellent history of nature conservation in the context of the Lowlands, see Van der Windt (1995).
- 4.
I borrowed and translated this term from the work of Schroevers (1999).
- 5.
Standard paleoecological theory holds that almost all of Europe prior to the advent of agriculture consisted out of closed canopy forests. This has always formed a problem for European conservationism, in the sense that many of the species present in our current European landscapes are light-loving species which were able to colonize places beyond their original ranges because of the clearing of the forest for agricultural purposes. There are however ecologists, among which most notably Dutch ecologist Frans Vera (1997), who claim that the original European landscape was more open and park-like. The theories of Vera have however sparked off a lively ecological debate in which they have been roundly criticized, vindicating the consensus that (at least Western Europe, but probably all of Europe) was and would become a closed canopy forest under wilderness condition. See Van Vuure (2003) and Rackham (2006) for an overview of the relevant discussions.
- 6.
Robert Elliot is of course of Australian origin. However, Australia being part of the New World, Elliot works from an ecological context that is more similar to the American then the European.
- 7.
I reinterpreted the work of Elliot to make it suitable for use in a European context in a totally different direction in Deliège (2010).
- 8.
See footnote 4.
- 9.
Kate Rawles (2004) remarks that the biodiversity concept indeed seems inherently managerial.
- 10.
For the argument developed in this section, I am greatly indebted to the work of Burms and De Dijn (1995), especially chapter 1.
- 11.
I take this example from Arnold Burms (2011, 142–146).
- 12.
My attention was drawn to this example through the reading of James (2009, 83–85). Although my treatment of the symbolic stays very close to his, I stress the importance and consequences of the material embodiment of meanings somewhat more forcefully.
- 13.
Although I cannot develop this point here, I believe that a similar drive lies at the heart of rewilding projects in Europe. It is not because the presumed “wild” landscapes are more originary, or richer, that they are more valuable, but simply because they seem to have more of an air of permanence (see Munnik 2003).
- 14.
In many ways, the position for which I am arguing is close to that worked out in Holland et al. (2008), but it would take a new article to sketch the differences between my position and theirs. However, what is clear is that I put a far greater stress on the crucial role material continuity plays in the preservation of meaning than do Holland et al. (2008).
- 15.
This of course also entails that in our present society, when landscapes are arranged and rearranged on a rhythm dictated by a global market fueled by our fleeting desires, the capacity of landscape to gather meaning and appeal through their enduring presence over time, is greatly diminished.
References
Burms, A. 2008. Natuur en symbool. Ethische Perspectieven 18(3): 327–340.
Burms, B. 2011. Waarheid, evocatie, symbool. Leuven: Peeters.
Burms, B., and H. De Dijn. 1995. Rationaliteit en haar grenzen. Kritiek en deconstructie. Leuven: Universitaire pers Leuven.
Deliège, G. 2010. The Cinquefoil controversy. Restoring relics between managers and purists. Environmental Ethics 32(1): 17–32.
Drenthen, M. 2005. Wildness as a critical border concept: Nietzsche and the debate on nature restoration. Environmental Values 14(3): 317–337.
Elliot, R. 1982. Faking nature. Inquiry 25(1): 81–93.
Elliot, R. 1997. Faking nature. London: Routledge.
Holland, A., A. Light, and J. O’Neill. 2008. Environmental values. London: Routledge.
James, S. 2009. The presence of nature. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Katz, E. 1997. Nature as subject. Human obligation and natural community. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Leopold, A. 2001. A sand county almanac. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mergeay, J., and L. De Meester. 2010. Introducties en rationaliteit in het natuurbeheer. Natuur.Focus 9(3): 124–127.
Munnik, R. 2003. Natuur en Weerstand. In Het eigen gewicht van de dingen, ed. K. van der Wal and M. Coolen, 43–74. Budel: Damon.
Nabhan, G. 1995. Cultural Parallax in viewing North American habitats. In Reinventing nature: Response to postmodern deconstruction, ed. M. Soulé and G. Lease, 87–101. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Rackham, O. 2006. Woodlands. London: Harper Collins.
Rawles, K. 2004. Biological diversity and conservation policy. In Philosophy and biodiversity, ed. M. Oksanen and J. Pietarinen, 199–216. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schroevers, P. 1999. Menselijk bemiddelde natuur. In Landschap in meervoud, ed. J. Kolen and T. Lemaire, 141–160. Utrecht: Jan van Arkel.
Thompson, J. 2000. Environment as cultural heritage. Environmental Ethics 22(3): 241–258.
Van der Windt, H. 1995. En dan? Wat is natuur nog in dit land? Natuurbescherming in Nederland 1880–1990. Amsterdam: Boom.
Van Vuure, C. 2003. De Oeros: het spoor terug. Wageningen: Wageningen University & Research Centre (WUR).
Vera, F. 1997. Metaforen voor wildernis: eik, hazelaar, rund en paard. Wageningen: Wageningen University & Research Centre (WUR).
Williams, B. 1995. Making sense of humanity and other philosophical papers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Deliège, G. (2014). Enduring Nature. In: Drenthen, M., Keulartz, J. (eds) Old World and New World Perspectives in Environmental Philosophy. The International Library of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Ethics, vol 21. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07683-6_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07683-6_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-07682-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-07683-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)