Technology and ecological economics: Promethean technology, Pandorian potential

Small, Bruce; Jollands, Nigel

doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.09.013

Cited by 20 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite having a large range of intentionally positive applications, it is also clear that GE and gene therapy could create harm in the world through accidental unforeseen and unintended side effects, incidental effects -known side effects associated with positive intentional effects, or from malevolent intent (Small & Jollands, 2006). For example, scientists experimenting with the mouse pox virus (a mouse analogue of smallpox in humans) accidentally succeeded in making the virus much more virulent and deadly -killing even mice vaccinated against the disease (Jackson, et al, 2001).…”

Section: Genetic Engineering and The Potential For Harmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is currently a range of potential threats to the sustainability of human and other life on earth (Bostrom, 2002;Brown, 2008;Rees, 2003). These threats are related to the increasing number of humans inhabiting Earth and our technological power to effect and impact nature (Small & Jollands, 2006). Main threats include resource depletion, deforestation, land and soil depletion, species extinction, pollution, peak oil, and climate change (Brown, 2008;Rees, 2003).…”

Section: Genetic Engineering and Some Potential Planetary Threatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nanotechnology will play an important role in the field of tissue engineering and organ regeneration through the generation of biomaterial scaffolding to maintain and regulate cell behaviour such as apoptosis, proliferation and differentiation (Chen, Mrksich, Huang, Whitesides, & Ingber, 1997;McBeath, Pirone, Nelson, Bhadriraju, & Chen, 2004). Small and Jollands (2006) argued that convergence will make these technologies, including genetic engineering, more accessible to an ever widening population. Such accessibility will enhance the ability of the 'do it yourself' brigade to genetically engineer and 'biohack' life.…”

Section: Genetic Engineering and Technological Convergencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Genetic Engineering and Moral Responsibility

Small¹

2012

Genetic Engineering - Basics, New Applications and Responsibilities

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Genetic Engineering and The Potential For Harmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Genetic Engineering and Some Potential Planetary Threatsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Genetic Engineering and Technological Convergencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Genetic Engineering and Moral Responsibility

Small¹

2012

Genetic Engineering - Basics, New Applications and Responsibilities

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Small and Jollands (2006) suggest the distinction between three types of risk: accidental risk, incidental risk and malevolent risk. While accidental risks relate to unforeseen and unexpected events, caused by lack of knowledge, incidental risks arise when we become aware of the harmful consequences, without being able to or willing to deal with the problems immediately.…”

Section: Environmental Risk Quality and Responsibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In evaluating the risks of new technologies, Small and Jollands (2006) argue that it is essential to start from a deeper understanding of human nature. They suggest that there is a growing tension between the emerging technological power over nature and the current (in)ability of our human nature to deal with the potentially disastrous ecological and social consequences of technology diffusion.…”

Section: Environmental Risk Quality and Responsibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“The worth of a wildflower”: Precautionary perspectives on the environmental risk of GMOs

Aslaksen

Myhr²

2007

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:How much is a wildflower worth? Inspired by "The worth of a songbird" by Funtowicz and Ravetz (1994) we use the value of a wildflower as symbol of the complexity of evaluating environmental qualities and risks. We critically discuss the application of cost-benefit analysis in evaluating environmental impacts of adoption of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). We argue that costbenefit analysis should be supplemented with other methods, such as processes for assessing uncertainty, accommodation of scientific disagreements, and integration of stakeholders' interests and perspectives. A more inclusive perspective is to develop precautionary approaches that recognize the multidimensional nature of environmental qualities and risks, such as irreplaceability, irreversibility, uncertainty and complexity. Precautionary approaches can contribute to develop a stronger environmental responsibility within the framework of rational self-interest.Keywords: cost-benefit analysis, environmental risk, environmental value, genetically modified organisms, precautionary principle, scientific uncertainty. JEL classification: D81, Q20, Q50Acknowledgement: This paper grew out of a bioethical nature walk, several days across the Hardangervidda national park in Norway, while discussing ethical and philosophical questions about quality in nature and technology, and environmental risk, with Robert Pirsig's book, "Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance" as a point of reference for discussing quality. We would like to thank Silvio Funtowicz, Kamilla Kjølberg and Roger Strand, as well as all the participants, for providing this unique opportunity to reflect on our own relationship to nature and how our perception of quality is influenced by being in nature, walking in pristine wilderness, and relying on each other. We would also like to thank Mads Greaker for encouragement to write this paper, without implicating him even slightly in what is written here, and we would like to thank Anne Skoglund for excellent word processing and editing.

show abstract

Changing Ecosystem Service Values Following Technological Change

Honey-Rosés

Schneider

Brozović

2014

Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on ecosystem services has focused mostly on natural areas or remote places, with less attention given to urban ecosystem services and their relationship with technological change. However, recent work by urban ecologists and urban designers has more closely examined and appreciated the opportunities associated with integrating natural and built infrastructures. Nevertheless, a perception remains in the literature on ecosystem services that technology may easily and irreversibly substitute for services previously obtained from ecosystems, especially when the superiority of the engineered system motivated replacement in the first place. We emphasize that the expected tradeoff between natural and manufactured capital is false. Rather, as argued in other contexts, the adoption of new technologies is complementary to ecosystem management. The complementarity of ecosystem services and technology is illustrated with a case study in Barcelona, Spain where the installation of sophisticated water treatment technology increased the value of the ecosystem services found there. Interestingly, the complementarity between natural and built infrastructures may remain even for the very ecosystems that are affected by the technological change. This finding suggests that we can expect the value of ecosystem services to co-evolve with new technologies. Technological innovation can generate new opportunities to harness value from ecosystems, and the engineered structures found in cities may generate more reliance on ecosystem processes, not less.

show abstract

Technology and ecological economics: Promethean technology, Pandorian potential

Cited by 20 publications

References 18 publications

Genetic Engineering and Moral Responsibility

Genetic Engineering and Moral Responsibility

“The worth of a wildflower”: Precautionary perspectives on the environmental risk of GMOs

Changing Ecosystem Service Values Following Technological Change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About