Commentary: Underestimating the Challenges of Avoiding a Ghastly Future
(2021) In Frontiers in Conservation Science 2.- Abstract
- Bradshaw et al. (2021) make a call to action in light of three major crises—biodiversity loss, the sixth mass extinction, and climate disruption. We have no contention with Bradshaw et al.’s diagnosis of the severity of the crises. Yet, their call for scientists to “tell it like it is,” their appeal to political “leaders,” and the great attention they afford to human population growth as a main driver underpinning the three crises, rest on contested assumptions about the role of science in societal transformations, and are scientifically flawed and politically problematic. In this commentary, we challenge Bradshaw et al.’s assumptions concerning the nature of science, polity, and humanity as well as the implicit politics underlying their... (More)
- Bradshaw et al. (2021) make a call to action in light of three major crises—biodiversity loss, the sixth mass extinction, and climate disruption. We have no contention with Bradshaw et al.’s diagnosis of the severity of the crises. Yet, their call for scientists to “tell it like it is,” their appeal to political “leaders,” and the great attention they afford to human population growth as a main driver underpinning the three crises, rest on contested assumptions about the role of science in societal transformations, and are scientifically flawed and politically problematic. In this commentary, we challenge Bradshaw et al.’s assumptions concerning the nature of science, polity, and humanity as well as the implicit politics underlying their analysis and messaging. We end with an alternative call to action. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/1b41b1d9-9aff-4409-9ac4-27a9020e2d62
- author
- Bluwstein, Jevgeniy ; Asiyanbi, Adeniyi ; Dutta, Anwesha ; Huff, Amber ; Lund, Jens Friis ; De Rosa, Salvatore Paolo LU and Steinberger, Julia
- organization
- publishing date
- 2021-05-13
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Frontiers in Conservation Science
- volume
- 2
- article number
- 666910
- publisher
- Frontiers Media S. A.
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85144152944
- ISSN
- 2673-611X
- DOI
- 10.3389/fcosc.2021.666910
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 1b41b1d9-9aff-4409-9ac4-27a9020e2d62
- date added to LUP
- 2021-05-13 14:45:25
- date last changed
- 2024-01-21 04:15:36
@misc{1b41b1d9-9aff-4409-9ac4-27a9020e2d62, abstract = {{Bradshaw et al. (2021) make a call to action in light of three major crises—biodiversity loss, the sixth mass extinction, and climate disruption. We have no contention with Bradshaw et al.’s diagnosis of the severity of the crises. Yet, their call for scientists to “tell it like it is,” their appeal to political “leaders,” and the great attention they afford to human population growth as a main driver underpinning the three crises, rest on contested assumptions about the role of science in societal transformations, and are scientifically flawed and politically problematic. In this commentary, we challenge Bradshaw et al.’s assumptions concerning the nature of science, polity, and humanity as well as the implicit politics underlying their analysis and messaging. We end with an alternative call to action.}}, author = {{Bluwstein, Jevgeniy and Asiyanbi, Adeniyi and Dutta, Anwesha and Huff, Amber and Lund, Jens Friis and De Rosa, Salvatore Paolo and Steinberger, Julia}}, issn = {{2673-611X}}, language = {{eng}}, month = {{05}}, publisher = {{Frontiers Media S. A.}}, series = {{Frontiers in Conservation Science}}, title = {{Commentary: Underestimating the Challenges of Avoiding a Ghastly Future}}, url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fcosc.2021.666910}}, doi = {{10.3389/fcosc.2021.666910}}, volume = {{2}}, year = {{2021}}, }