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}
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.
ParksEnvironmental 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.