Relational Biodiversity Ethics

The planet is experiencing an accelerated loss of biodiversity. Why are the actions undertaken with the intention of mitigating the loss of biodiversity so conspicuously inefficient?

One of the root causes lies in the weak capacity of modern ethics to deal with the dynamic and relational concept of biodiversity.

The concept of biodiversity is inherently relational, which is why the protection of biodiversity lacks efficacious ethical support. A novel approach, relational biodiversity ethics (REBET), is required.

This study responds to this need and addresses two research gaps, integrating two discussions related to the question of whether and how the ""relational shift of thought"" can provide ethical assistance in accelerating biodiversity conservation (BDC).

On the one hand, there is an underexamined question in BDC research, how the relational framing of BDC can be translated into normative guidelines.

On the other hand, there is a debate in philosophy regarding the capacity of relational ethics, exemplified in, for example, feminist and care ethicists, to maintain the conditions of responsibility and normativity.

In contrast with the modern concept of autonomy as a feature of an isolated, free, and impartial individual, relational ethics advocates for an embodied and relational concept of autonomy.

The objective of this research is to elucidate the normative implications of the relational shift for BDC and to establish the foundations REBET to facilitate transformation for biodiversity.

Three key questions must be addressed: What are the theoretical implications of a relational turn for biodiversity ethics?

Can relational ethics withstand the philosophical critiques with the aid of the parallel discussion of responsive ethics and interdisciplinary inputs? And what are the guidelines of REBET for BDC?