恢复、责任和基线问题

Restoration, obligation, and the baseline problem

我们是否应该将退化了的自然恢复原貌?如果是,为什么应该?环境理论家经常以各种思路探讨恢复自然这个问题,他们的观点隐含在涉及面要宽广得多的研讨激辩当中,特别是有关自然实体的内在价值和道德地位的讨论。可惜的是,这些思路或途径容易受到基线(baseline)等问题的困扰;基线问题是一种哲学加技术的问题,它涉及如何确认一条合适的恢复基线。只要是把恢复目标锚定于将生态系统恢复到某个特定的基准状态,并且指望确定这条基准线作为成功标志,环境恢复项目就基本无望实现。依据责任而不是依照地位、价值或意义来处理环境恢复问题,可以避开基线等老大难问题。如果以主体间认可的理由证明我们的行动是正当合理的,继而推断出恢复自然之责任,我们便可以将恢复挽救出来,使之免受基线之困。

Should we restore degraded nature, and if so, why? Environmental theorists often approach the problem of restoration from perspectives couched in much broader debates, particularly regarding the intrinsic value and moral status of natural entities. Unfortunately, such approaches are susceptible to concerns such as the baseline problem, which is both a philosophical and technical issue related to identifying an appropriate restoration baseline. Insofar as restoration ostensibly aims to return an ecosystem to a particular baseline state, and depends upon clearly identifying this baseline for success, the very project of restoration appears impossible to get off the ground. Recasting environmental restoration in terms of obligations, instead of status, value, or worth, can avoid this and other classic challenges. If obligations to restore nature follow from intersubjectively validated reasons to justify our actions, we can salvage restoration from the threat of the baseline problem.