As we hurtle into the planet's sixth great extinction event, debates rage in conservation biology about how to strengthen society's regard for nature. We need much greater recognition of nature's values but how do we understand, identify and measure them?
The framers of Australia's biodiversity conservation strategy envision a society that values nature 'both in its own right and for its essential contribution to our existence'. For many years philosophers and biologists have debated which of these two ways of valuing nature – intrinsically or instrumentally – is the more legitimate and useful. Should we advocate the protection of nature for its own sake because this is the right thing to do regardless of any benefits for humans, or should we acknowledge that not everyone shares the same moral compass, and focus on promoting the 'use' values of nature (what nature does for us)? The first is nature-centred and the second human-centred.