在人类世:适应法则、生态健康和生物技术

Q1 Social Sciences Law, Innovation and Technology Pub Date : 2023-01-02 DOI:10.1080/17579961.2023.2184133
Alejandro E. Camacho
{"title":"在人类世:适应法则、生态健康和生物技术","authors":"Alejandro E. Camacho","doi":"10.1080/17579961.2023.2184133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Climate change has induced an ecological crisis necessitating reconsideration of how the law should manage human interactions with ecological systems. In most Western legal regimes, conservation policy has principally sought to advance historical or natural preservation or sustained yield objectives, while many laws governing biotechnologies focus on minimising exposure to ‘natural’ systems. Meanwhile, Western public processes are largely built on a legal framework that assumes comprehensive rationality at the front end of decision-making. Lastly, prevailing public conservation governance is fragmented, save the limited attempts to consolidate or coordinate decentralised, independent, and/or overlapping authority. The increasingly convulsive effects of climate change and developments in biotechnology bring to stark relief the limitations of prevailing Western public conservation goals, processes, and institutional design. First, promoting biodiversity may require fundamental changes in management to focus on increasing ecological health and other values than consumption, historical fidelity, and nonintervention. Second, integration of adaptive and inclusive processes is imperative for promoting both effective management strategies and learning in the face of unprecedented change. Third, policymakers must appreciate the tradeoffs of allocating authority across the array of institutional structures, and tailor not only the scale of interventions but also the extent of overlap and coordination of authority.","PeriodicalId":37639,"journal":{"name":"Law, Innovation and Technology","volume":"15 1","pages":"280 - 312"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In the Anthropocene: adaptive law, ecological health, and biotechnologies\",\"authors\":\"Alejandro E. Camacho\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17579961.2023.2184133\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Climate change has induced an ecological crisis necessitating reconsideration of how the law should manage human interactions with ecological systems. In most Western legal regimes, conservation policy has principally sought to advance historical or natural preservation or sustained yield objectives, while many laws governing biotechnologies focus on minimising exposure to ‘natural’ systems. Meanwhile, Western public processes are largely built on a legal framework that assumes comprehensive rationality at the front end of decision-making. Lastly, prevailing public conservation governance is fragmented, save the limited attempts to consolidate or coordinate decentralised, independent, and/or overlapping authority. The increasingly convulsive effects of climate change and developments in biotechnology bring to stark relief the limitations of prevailing Western public conservation goals, processes, and institutional design. First, promoting biodiversity may require fundamental changes in management to focus on increasing ecological health and other values than consumption, historical fidelity, and nonintervention. Second, integration of adaptive and inclusive processes is imperative for promoting both effective management strategies and learning in the face of unprecedented change. Third, policymakers must appreciate the tradeoffs of allocating authority across the array of institutional structures, and tailor not only the scale of interventions but also the extent of overlap and coordination of authority.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37639,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law, Innovation and Technology\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"280 - 312\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law, Innovation and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2184133\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law, Innovation and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2023.2184133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

气候变化引发了生态危机,需要重新考虑法律应如何管理人类与生态系统的相互作用。在大多数西方法律制度中,保护政策主要是寻求推进历史或自然保护或持续产量目标,而许多管理生物技术的法律侧重于尽量减少对“自然”系统的暴露。与此同时,西方的公共程序在很大程度上建立在一个法律框架上,该框架在决策的前端假设了全面的理性。最后,普遍的公共保护治理是碎片化的,除了整合或协调分散的、独立的和/或重叠的权力的有限尝试。气候变化和生物技术的发展所带来的日益剧烈的影响,使盛行的西方公共保护目标、程序和制度设计的局限性暴露无遗。首先,促进生物多样性可能需要从根本上改变管理方式,将重点放在提高生态健康和其他价值上,而不是消费、历史保真度和不干预。第二,在面对前所未有的变化时,为了促进有效的管理战略和学习,整合适应性和包容性过程是必不可少的。第三,政策制定者必须认识到在一系列制度结构中分配权力的权衡,不仅要调整干预的规模,还要调整权力重叠和协调的程度。
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
In the Anthropocene: adaptive law, ecological health, and biotechnologies
ABSTRACT Climate change has induced an ecological crisis necessitating reconsideration of how the law should manage human interactions with ecological systems. In most Western legal regimes, conservation policy has principally sought to advance historical or natural preservation or sustained yield objectives, while many laws governing biotechnologies focus on minimising exposure to ‘natural’ systems. Meanwhile, Western public processes are largely built on a legal framework that assumes comprehensive rationality at the front end of decision-making. Lastly, prevailing public conservation governance is fragmented, save the limited attempts to consolidate or coordinate decentralised, independent, and/or overlapping authority. The increasingly convulsive effects of climate change and developments in biotechnology bring to stark relief the limitations of prevailing Western public conservation goals, processes, and institutional design. First, promoting biodiversity may require fundamental changes in management to focus on increasing ecological health and other values than consumption, historical fidelity, and nonintervention. Second, integration of adaptive and inclusive processes is imperative for promoting both effective management strategies and learning in the face of unprecedented change. Third, policymakers must appreciate the tradeoffs of allocating authority across the array of institutional structures, and tailor not only the scale of interventions but also the extent of overlap and coordination of authority.
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
Law, Innovation and Technology
Law, Innovation and Technology Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Stem cell research, cloning, GMOs ... How do regulations affect such emerging technologies? What impact do new technologies have on law? And can we rely on technology itself as a regulatory tool? The meeting of law and technology is rapidly becoming an increasingly significant (and controversial) topic. Law, Innovation and Technology is, however, the only journal to engage fully with it, setting an innovative and distinctive agenda for lawyers, ethicists and policy makers. Spanning ICTs, biotechnologies, nanotechnologies, neurotechnologies, robotics and AI, it offers a unique forum for the highest level of reflection on this essential area.
期刊最新文献
Predictive analytics and the collective dimensions of data protection The relationship between law and technology: comparing legal responses to creators’ rights under copyright law through safe harbour for online intermediaries and generative AI technology Navigating the dichotomy of smart prisons: between surveillance and rehabilitation Ethics reviews in the European Union. Implications for the governance of scientific research in times of data science and Artificial Intelligence The EU legal framework for algorithmic recommender systems: I (don’t) know it when I see it
×
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