Posted at 2016.04.27 Category : New Yorker
hands-onといえばTOEICではhands-on training（現場研修、実地研修）、hands-on management（現場主義の管理）が登場します。以前ブログでも書かせてもらいましたが、hand-onがいい場合も、hands-offがいい場合もあるのであくまでも文脈によります。紹介する記事は果たしてどちらがいいのか考えさせてくれるものです。
自然保護の場合人が関わらないhands-off approachが一般的に想像するものですが、先々週のNew Yorkerでは人工的に自然保護に取り組むケースを2例紹介してくれていました。Sixth ExtinctionのElizabeth Kolbertによるレポートなので読み応えがあります。正直具体的なサンゴや栗の木のアプローチは専門的すぎて内容の理解度は低かったですが。。。
Annals of Science APRIL 18, 2016 ISSUE
Unnatural Selection
What will it take to save the world’s reefs and forests?
BY ELIZABETH KOLBERT
自然に任せるのではなく人間が保護すべき自然を選んで取り組むことから、Unnatural Selectionというタイトルをつけています。以下は、最後の人間が関わるアプローチの是非を考えているくだりです。
As the world warms, and the oceans acidify, and species are reshuffled from one continent to another, it’s increasingly difficult to say what would count as conservation. In his most recent book, “Half-Earth,” the biologist E. O. Wilson argues that the best hope for the planet’s remaining species lies in leaving them alone. Even today, there are vast regions where, Wilson writes, “natural processes unfold in the absence of deliberate human intervention.” (The Amazon Basin is one such region; the Serengeti is another.) We ought to allow these processes to continue, Wilson argues. To this end, he recommends setting aside fifty per cent of the planet’s surface as reserves.
“Give the rest of Earth’s life a chance,” he pleads.
Those scientists who recommend this sort of hands-off approach—and there are many of them—stress the limits of what science can accomplish. Just because you can break an egg doesn’t mean you can put it back together. They argue that even the best-intentioned intervention can do more harm than good. People may read about a project like Gates’s or Powell’s and take exactly the wrong lesson from it.
“There’s a lot of psychology here,” Terry Hughes told me. “There is a danger of thinking we’ve found the technological solution, so therefore we can keep damaging reefs, because we can always fix them in the future.
“In terms of protecting ecosystems like coral reefs or rain forests, prevention is always better than cure,” he added.
Advocates for techniques like assisted evolution and genetic engineering argue that the moment for being hands off has passed. Humans have already so violently altered the world that without “deliberate intervention” the future holds only loss and more loss.
“There’s just too many people right now,” Powell told me. “I always say, ‘We need a full toolbox of methods to keep our forests healthy.’ And we shouldn’t limit it by saying, ‘Well, you can do this method but you can’t do that method.’
“You have emerald ash borer going through right now,” he went on. (The borer, another import from Asia, is killing ash trees from Colorado to New Hampshire.) “Should we just leave the ash trees and say, O.K., they’re gone? Woolly adelgid is killing the hemlocks. If we lose all the hemlocks, do we just say, O.K., that’s gone? There’s what’s called thousand-cankers disease that’s spreading on walnuts right now. Is that the kind of attitude we should have? We have all these challenges out there, and the question is: Should we just let the trees die out? And to me that’s not an option.”
geoengineeringでも同じことですが、人間が自然保護にも手を加えようとする態度への懸念は主に2点あるでしょうか。一つ目はよいと思ってやったことも害になる可能性があること。
Those scientists who recommend this sort of hands-off approach—and there are many of them—stress the limits of what science can accomplish. Just because you can break an egg doesn’t mean you can put it back together. They argue that even the best-intentioned intervention can do more harm than good.
二つ目は技術的な解決方法があればもっと自然破壊をしていいという考え方につながりやすいこと。
“There is a danger of thinking we’ve found the technological solution, so therefore we can keep damaging reefs, because we can always fix them in the future.
記事の締めを紹介してしまい申し訳ありませんが、Yutaは諦観した態度をとるよりも、無駄なあがきでもいいからできる限りのことをしたいというタイプなので彼女には共感を覚えてしまいます。
“There are many, many unknowns,” she went on. “And people are very quick to criticize based on ‘But what happens if this doesn’t work and what happens if this doesn’t work?’ And I say, ‘Well, I don’t know now, but I know I’ll know more when I get there.’ And I feel that we’re at this point where we need to throw caution to the wind and just try.”
自然保護の場合人が関わらないhands-off approachが一般的に想像するものですが、先々週のNew Yorkerでは人工的に自然保護に取り組むケースを2例紹介してくれていました。Sixth ExtinctionのElizabeth Kolbertによるレポートなので読み応えがあります。正直具体的なサンゴや栗の木のアプローチは専門的すぎて内容の理解度は低かったですが。。。
Annals of Science APRIL 18, 2016 ISSUE
Unnatural Selection
What will it take to save the world’s reefs and forests?
BY ELIZABETH KOLBERT
自然に任せるのではなく人間が保護すべき自然を選んで取り組むことから、Unnatural Selectionというタイトルをつけています。以下は、最後の人間が関わるアプローチの是非を考えているくだりです。
As the world warms, and the oceans acidify, and species are reshuffled from one continent to another, it’s increasingly difficult to say what would count as conservation. In his most recent book, “Half-Earth,” the biologist E. O. Wilson argues that the best hope for the planet’s remaining species lies in leaving them alone. Even today, there are vast regions where, Wilson writes, “natural processes unfold in the absence of deliberate human intervention.” (The Amazon Basin is one such region; the Serengeti is another.) We ought to allow these processes to continue, Wilson argues. To this end, he recommends setting aside fifty per cent of the planet’s surface as reserves.
“Give the rest of Earth’s life a chance,” he pleads.
Those scientists who recommend this sort of hands-off approach—and there are many of them—stress the limits of what science can accomplish. Just because you can break an egg doesn’t mean you can put it back together. They argue that even the best-intentioned intervention can do more harm than good. People may read about a project like Gates’s or Powell’s and take exactly the wrong lesson from it.
“There’s a lot of psychology here,” Terry Hughes told me. “There is a danger of thinking we’ve found the technological solution, so therefore we can keep damaging reefs, because we can always fix them in the future.
“In terms of protecting ecosystems like coral reefs or rain forests, prevention is always better than cure,” he added.
Advocates for techniques like assisted evolution and genetic engineering argue that the moment for being hands off has passed. Humans have already so violently altered the world that without “deliberate intervention” the future holds only loss and more loss.
“There’s just too many people right now,” Powell told me. “I always say, ‘We need a full toolbox of methods to keep our forests healthy.’ And we shouldn’t limit it by saying, ‘Well, you can do this method but you can’t do that method.’
“You have emerald ash borer going through right now,” he went on. (The borer, another import from Asia, is killing ash trees from Colorado to New Hampshire.) “Should we just leave the ash trees and say, O.K., they’re gone? Woolly adelgid is killing the hemlocks. If we lose all the hemlocks, do we just say, O.K., that’s gone? There’s what’s called thousand-cankers disease that’s spreading on walnuts right now. Is that the kind of attitude we should have? We have all these challenges out there, and the question is: Should we just let the trees die out? And to me that’s not an option.”
geoengineeringでも同じことですが、人間が自然保護にも手を加えようとする態度への懸念は主に2点あるでしょうか。一つ目はよいと思ってやったことも害になる可能性があること。
Those scientists who recommend this sort of hands-off approach—and there are many of them—stress the limits of what science can accomplish. Just because you can break an egg doesn’t mean you can put it back together. They argue that even the best-intentioned intervention can do more harm than good.
二つ目は技術的な解決方法があればもっと自然破壊をしていいという考え方につながりやすいこと。
“There is a danger of thinking we’ve found the technological solution, so therefore we can keep damaging reefs, because we can always fix them in the future.
記事の締めを紹介してしまい申し訳ありませんが、Yutaは諦観した態度をとるよりも、無駄なあがきでもいいからできる限りのことをしたいというタイプなので彼女には共感を覚えてしまいます。
“There are many, many unknowns,” she went on. “And people are very quick to criticize based on ‘But what happens if this doesn’t work and what happens if this doesn’t work?’ And I say, ‘Well, I don’t know now, but I know I’ll know more when I get there.’ And I feel that we’re at this point where we need to throw caution to the wind and just try.”
スポンサーサイト
Tracback
この記事にトラックバックする(FC2ブログユーザー)