森林是社会的一面镜子:森林管理方法对人类社会关系有何启示?

Andrew Walton
{"title":"森林是社会的一面镜子:森林管理方法对人类社会关系有何启示?","authors":"Andrew Walton","doi":"10.1002/bes2.2110","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>There is evidence to suggest that the nature of human impact upon forests, measured both quantitatively and qualitatively, tells a story about dominant social paradigms throughout recent history. In this sense, forests are social mirrors. Collectively, we are consuming ecological resources at 1.5 times the rate they can be replenished, while often simplifying or adversely impacting forest ecosystems. At the same time, ecocentric and enlightened self-interest movements are emerging, manifest in woodland management approaches that embrace multiple values, ecological sensitivity, and traditional ecological knowledge. The evidence therefore shows that contradictory paradigms exist alongside each other, exerting influence over landscapes at shared temporal and spatial scales simultaneously. Consequently, forest management reflects the sociocultural dynamics of a species experiencing cognitive dissonance; responding to human ideals around the need to tread lightly and the contradictory reality of an ever-increasing economic output.</p>","PeriodicalId":93418,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America","volume":"105 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bes2.2110","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Forests as Social Mirrors: What do Approaches to Forest Management Tell us About Human Social Relations?\",\"authors\":\"Andrew Walton\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/bes2.2110\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>There is evidence to suggest that the nature of human impact upon forests, measured both quantitatively and qualitatively, tells a story about dominant social paradigms throughout recent history. In this sense, forests are social mirrors. Collectively, we are consuming ecological resources at 1.5 times the rate they can be replenished, while often simplifying or adversely impacting forest ecosystems. At the same time, ecocentric and enlightened self-interest movements are emerging, manifest in woodland management approaches that embrace multiple values, ecological sensitivity, and traditional ecological knowledge. The evidence therefore shows that contradictory paradigms exist alongside each other, exerting influence over landscapes at shared temporal and spatial scales simultaneously. Consequently, forest management reflects the sociocultural dynamics of a species experiencing cognitive dissonance; responding to human ideals around the need to tread lightly and the contradictory reality of an ever-increasing economic output.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93418,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America\",\"volume\":\"105 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bes2.2110\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bes2.2110\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bes2.2110","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

有证据表明,从数量和质量两方面衡量,人类对森林影响的性质反映了近代历史上占主导地位的社会模式。从这个意义上说,森林就是社会的一面镜子。总的来说,我们消耗生态资源的速度是其可补充速度的 1.5 倍,同时还经常简化森林生态系统或对其造成不利影响。与此同时,以生态为中心和开明自利的运动正在兴起,表现在林地管理方法上,这些方法包含多重价值、生态敏感性和传统生态知识。因此,有证据表明,相互矛盾的模式同时存在,在共同的时间和空间尺度上同时对地貌产生影响。因此,森林管理反映了一个物种的社会文化动态,这个物种正经历着认知失调;既要满足人类轻装上阵的理想,又要面对经济产出不断增长的矛盾现实。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Forests as Social Mirrors: What do Approaches to Forest Management Tell us About Human Social Relations?

There is evidence to suggest that the nature of human impact upon forests, measured both quantitatively and qualitatively, tells a story about dominant social paradigms throughout recent history. In this sense, forests are social mirrors. Collectively, we are consuming ecological resources at 1.5 times the rate they can be replenished, while often simplifying or adversely impacting forest ecosystems. At the same time, ecocentric and enlightened self-interest movements are emerging, manifest in woodland management approaches that embrace multiple values, ecological sensitivity, and traditional ecological knowledge. The evidence therefore shows that contradictory paradigms exist alongside each other, exerting influence over landscapes at shared temporal and spatial scales simultaneously. Consequently, forest management reflects the sociocultural dynamics of a species experiencing cognitive dissonance; responding to human ideals around the need to tread lightly and the contradictory reality of an ever-increasing economic output.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Cover From Prototype to Reality: Moving Beyond the Technology Hype in Ecological Research Urban Scavengers: Human Activities Underpin Sandy Beach Scavenging Dynamics Review of COS 173-Education Research and Assessment: Pathways for Engaging Students in Socioecological Systems
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1