太阳底下没有什么新鲜的东西——环保主义者可以从以前的流行病中吸取教训

Q1 Environmental Science Parks Pub Date : 2021-03-11 DOI:10.2305/IUCN.CH.2021.PARKS-27-SIOH.EN
Olivier Hymas, Bruna Rocha, N. Guerrero, Mauricio Torres, K. Ndong, Gretchen Walters
{"title":"太阳底下没有什么新鲜的东西——环保主义者可以从以前的流行病中吸取教训","authors":"Olivier Hymas, Bruna Rocha, N. Guerrero, Mauricio Torres, K. Ndong, Gretchen Walters","doi":"10.2305/IUCN.CH.2021.PARKS-27-SIOH.EN","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In many industrialised societies, the COVID-19 pandemic has been painted as an unprecedented moment caused by human abuse of nature. Responses to it have, in turn, temporarily slowed down human impacts upon nature. This has led to a rallying cry against human encroachment into what are claimed to be pristine wildernesses. Reflecting upon historic, archaeological and palaeoecological evidence relating to the impacts of past epidemics within a wider historical timeframe from Africa and South America, we show that though COVID-19 is a novel disease, the pandemic itself does not represent a novel event, since diseases brought by Europeans have previously decimated the peoples living in these areas. The ‘pristine wilderness’ is a myth, which falsely held that these places had always been empty of people, thus helping to legitimate the creation of protected areas, and their political control by both colonial and national administrations. We therefore question the assumption behind what has been termed the ‘anthropause’ – that the supposed reduction in anthropogenic activities caused by the current pandemic presents a new opportunity to study anthropogenic impacts on nature: numerous previous occasions exist where depopulation resulted in anthropauses. Such responses to COVID-19 suggest further interdisciplinarity is needed in the field of conservation, in spite of advances in this direction.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"There’s nothing new under the sun – lessons conservationists could learn from previous pandemics\",\"authors\":\"Olivier Hymas, Bruna Rocha, N. Guerrero, Mauricio Torres, K. Ndong, Gretchen Walters\",\"doi\":\"10.2305/IUCN.CH.2021.PARKS-27-SIOH.EN\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In many industrialised societies, the COVID-19 pandemic has been painted as an unprecedented moment caused by human abuse of nature. Responses to it have, in turn, temporarily slowed down human impacts upon nature. This has led to a rallying cry against human encroachment into what are claimed to be pristine wildernesses. Reflecting upon historic, archaeological and palaeoecological evidence relating to the impacts of past epidemics within a wider historical timeframe from Africa and South America, we show that though COVID-19 is a novel disease, the pandemic itself does not represent a novel event, since diseases brought by Europeans have previously decimated the peoples living in these areas. The ‘pristine wilderness’ is a myth, which falsely held that these places had always been empty of people, thus helping to legitimate the creation of protected areas, and their political control by both colonial and national administrations. We therefore question the assumption behind what has been termed the ‘anthropause’ – that the supposed reduction in anthropogenic activities caused by the current pandemic presents a new opportunity to study anthropogenic impacts on nature: numerous previous occasions exist where depopulation resulted in anthropauses. Such responses to COVID-19 suggest further interdisciplinarity is needed in the field of conservation, in spite of advances in this direction.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37571,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Parks\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Parks\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2021.PARKS-27-SIOH.EN\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Environmental Science\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Parks","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2021.PARKS-27-SIOH.EN","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Environmental Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

在许多工业化社会,新冠肺炎大流行被描绘成人类虐待自然造成的前所未有的时刻。反过来,对它的反应暂时减缓了人类对自然的影响。这引发了反对人类侵占所谓原始荒野的号召。根据与非洲和南美洲过去流行病在更广泛的历史时间范围内的影响有关的历史、考古和古生态证据,我们表明,尽管新冠肺炎是一种新的疾病,但这一流行病本身并不代表一个新的事件,因为欧洲人带来的疾病以前曾使生活在这些地区的人民大量死亡。“原始荒野”是一个神话,它错误地认为这些地方一直没有人,从而有助于保护区的创建及其由殖民地和国家行政部门的政治控制合法化。因此,我们质疑所谓的“人类停顿”背后的假设,即当前疫情导致的人类活动减少为研究人类对自然的影响提供了一个新的机会:以前存在过许多人口减少导致人类停顿的情况。对新冠肺炎的这种反应表明,尽管在保护领域取得了进展,但仍需要进一步的跨学科性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
There’s nothing new under the sun – lessons conservationists could learn from previous pandemics
In many industrialised societies, the COVID-19 pandemic has been painted as an unprecedented moment caused by human abuse of nature. Responses to it have, in turn, temporarily slowed down human impacts upon nature. This has led to a rallying cry against human encroachment into what are claimed to be pristine wildernesses. Reflecting upon historic, archaeological and palaeoecological evidence relating to the impacts of past epidemics within a wider historical timeframe from Africa and South America, we show that though COVID-19 is a novel disease, the pandemic itself does not represent a novel event, since diseases brought by Europeans have previously decimated the peoples living in these areas. The ‘pristine wilderness’ is a myth, which falsely held that these places had always been empty of people, thus helping to legitimate the creation of protected areas, and their political control by both colonial and national administrations. We therefore question the assumption behind what has been termed the ‘anthropause’ – that the supposed reduction in anthropogenic activities caused by the current pandemic presents a new opportunity to study anthropogenic impacts on nature: numerous previous occasions exist where depopulation resulted in anthropauses. Such responses to COVID-19 suggest further interdisciplinarity is needed in the field of conservation, in spite of advances in this direction.
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
Parks
Parks Environmental Science-Nature and Landscape Conservation
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: We aim for PARKS to be a rigorous, challenging publication with high academic credibility and standing. But at the same time the journal is and should remain primarily a resource for people actively involved in establishing and managing protected areas, under any management category or governance type. We aim for the majority of papers accepted to include practical management information. We also work hard to include authors who are involved in management but do not usually find the time to report the results of their research and experience to a wider audience. We welcome submissions from people whose written English is imperfect as long as they have interesting research to report, backed up by firm evidence, and are happy to work with authors to develop papers for the journal. PARKS is published with the aim of strengthening international collaboration in protected area development and management by: • promoting understanding of the values and benefits derived from protected areas to governments, communities, visitors, business etc; • ensuring that protected areas fulfil their primary role in nature conservation while addressing critical issues such as ecologically sustainable development, social justice and climate change adaptation and mitigation; • serving as a leading global forum for the exchange of information on issues relating to protected areas, especially learning from case studies of applied ideas; • publishing articles reporting on recent applied research that is relevant to protected area management; • changing and improving protected area management, policy environment and socio-economic benefits through use of information provided in the journal; and • promoting IUCN’s work on protected areas.
期刊最新文献
Clarifying ‘long-term’ for protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs): why only 25 years of ‘intent’ does not qualify The World Heritage Convention, Protected Areas and Rivers: Challenges for Representation and Implications for International Water Cooperation A crisis of moral ecology: Magar agro-pastoralism in Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve, Nepal The benefits of the IUCN Green List in implementing effective park management in Queensland, Australia Nudging to glory: the World Heritage Convention’s influence in conflict-prone Global South natural sites
×
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