Natural Resources Management and the Second Copernican Revolution Fred P. Miller* ABSTRACT humanity’s fortunes are inescapably entangled with the future of the environment (Hails, 2002). If a sustainable future is to After many errant attempts, the first Copernican revolution be realized, humanity has no choice but to understand this in- finally placed planet earth in its correct astrophysical context. A second Copernican revolution is underway that places human- exorable interconnectedness and manage the environment’s ity in its appropriate environmental nexus. The future well-being ecosystems accordingly. Such a goal transcends the scientific of humanity is inexorably linked to our understanding of the nat- understanding of the geobiosphere. The sustainability of the ural world and to its sustainable management. This science- geobiosphere now is seen to be inseparably bound up with is- backed concept is profound, with great implications for agricul- sues of economic development, consumerism, social equity, ture and natural resources management and their related en- and international peace and security (Jasanoff et al., 1997; terprises and institutions. Agriculture and managed renewable Princen et al., 2002; Raskin et al., 2002; Raven, 2002; Speth, natural resources account for >90% of the nation’s terrestrial 2002). The essence of a second Copernican revolution, there- ecosystems. The management and stewardship of these vast fore, is the recognition of and respect for the unalterable sym- ecosystems along with the ecological goods and services derived biotic relationship between humanity’s future well-being and therefrom are huge and noble responsibilities. They need to be the integrity of those environmental processes (Table 1) that proclaimed more forcefully. Natural resources management and are requisite for sustaining that future. ecosystem stewardship must be ecology-based, including the The science community is on record, arguing convinc- human dimensions of ecosystem manipulation and natural re- ingly, that humanity cannot continue to harvest its sustenance source use. Until economic systems recognize the value of envi- unabated and extract resources indefinitely from the natural ronmental investments and marketability of ecological services, world with impunity (e.g., Cohen, 1995; Daily, 1997; Gewin, adoption of sustainable ecosystem management will be short-cir- 2002; Jasanoff et al., 1997; Lubchenco, 1998; NRC, 1999; cuited by rational economic decision-making under current eco- Princen et al., 2002; Raskin et al., 2002; Raven, 2002; Smil, nomic systems and personal values on the part of those respon- 2002; Speth, 2002; Tilman et al., 2002). Likewise, economists sible for managing these lands. A variety of forces are driving sus- and social scientists are coming to recognize the false ac- tainable ecosystem management, including science, environ- counting that current economic indicators impose upon the en- mental monitoring, valuation of nature’s services, consumer de- mands, education, and others. vironment’s goods and services (Table 1) and the social forces that drive unsustainable natural resource consumption and environmental degradation (e.g., Chichilnisky and Heal, 1998; CHELLNHUBER (1999) reminds us that the invention of the Cobb et al., 1995; Daily et al., 2000; Daily and Ellison, 2002; Soptical microscope in 1608 by the Dutch spectacle-maker Harvey, 2001; Hawken et al., 1999; Heal, 2000; Hutton and Zacharias Jansen allowed the human eye, for the first time, to Giddens, 2000; Lash, 2001; Masood and Garwin, 1998; transcend its natural limits and see the wonders of the micro- Napier, 2001; NRC, 1994; Quinn and Quinn, 2000; Raskin et cosmos. Another kind of optical amplification led to devel- al., 2002; Repetto and Magrath, 1989; Serageldin, 2002; opment of the telescope, which brought about the great Coper- Wackernagel et al., 2002; WRI, 2000). nican revolution, allowing humans to view the heavens and The profoundness of this message is central to those insti- their entities more clearly. Planet earth, after many errant at- tutions of higher education engaged in agricultural and natu- tempts, was finally put in its correct astrophysical context by ral resources management programs. The discipline of ecol- Copernicus and company. Schellnhuber (1999) postulates ogy, in its broadest sense (including the human dimensions), that a second Copernican revolution is underway, this one is at the core of this concept and provides a logical framework driven by the many revelations of scientific investigations upon which the issue can be debated and addressed. So, too, into the natural world. These advances strive to understand the can ecology serve as a framework for our agricultural and nat- earth system as a whole and to develop concepts for global nat- ural resources management curricula and programs. After all, ural resources management and sustainable ecosystem ma- agriculture and renewable natural resources management take nipulation. place across vast areas of the terrestrial biosphere and its component ecosystems. Therefore, those involved in the ed- PERSPECTIVE: ENVIRONMENTAL ucation and training of future ecosystem managers must im- SUSTAINABILITY AND HUMAN part an understanding of the ecological basis of ecosystem sus- WELL-BEING NEXUS tainability and the inextricable interconnectedness of the human well-being—natural world nexus. Human sustenance and well-being are inextricably linked to the natural world. Thus, the future of food production and TEMPERING THE TRANSFORMING AND TRASHING OF TERRA School of Natural Resources, Ohio State Univ., Received 14 Oct. 2002. *Corresponding author ([email protected]). Maddox (2000) posits that humans, for the most part, have Published in J. Nat. Resour. Life Sci. Educ. 32:43–51 (2003). opted out of the tyranny of natural selection. We shelter our- http://www.JNRLSE.org © American Society of Agronomy Abbreviations: GDP, gross domestic product; GSG, global scenario group; 677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA NGOs, nongovernmental organizations. J. Nat. Resour. Life Sci. Educ., Vol. 32, 2003 • 43 Table 1. Ecosystem processes, goods, and services (modified from Ehrlich cation linked with the scientific revelations about the work- and Ehrlich, 1991; Lubchenco et al., 1993; and Richardson, 1994). ings of our global village. Wilson (2002) believes people have Ecosystem processes include: an instinct to behave ethically. He envisions that the solution • Sustaining solar energy flux, heat dissipation • Climate modulation to global environmental degradation will begin with this • Sustaining hydrological flux, hydrological cycle, filtration, and water quality human characteristic. • Biological productivity, pollination, sustaining food webs, habitats • Sustaining biogeochemical flux, mineral and gaseous cycling, storage • Decomposition, weathering, soil genesis, forming and stabilizing landscapes • Sustaining biological diversity AMERICA’S EXPERIENCE: ENVIRONMENTAL • Absorbing, buffering, diluting, decomposing, detoxifying pollutants–- STEWARDSHIP IN A CENTURY OF CHANGE xenobiotics Ecosystem goods include: If strides toward ecosystem sustainability are to be made • Climate zones conducive to biological diversity and production globally, the first steps must occur nationally. Because of its • Food, wood, fiber, forage, wildlife, marine life extensiveness across America’s landscape, agriculture and • Soil and water resources, precipitation, fresh water • Renewable and nonrenewable natural resource base for human well-being managed renewable natural resources provide a window • Medicinal plants, sources of pharmaceuticals through which the nation’s changing agricultural character and • Biodiversity; gene pool for enhancing productivity, traits, stress resistance growth of its environmental stewardship can be viewed. • Natural aesthetics, amenities, biodiversity that support tourism, recreation The demographics and political character of America today Ecosystem services include: • Maintaining hydrologic cycles, watershed character, water quality are quite different than their 19th century counterparts. The • Modulating ground water recharge, runoff, and flooding USA experienced convulsive changes as the industrial revo- • Regulating climate, cleansing air and water, UV radiation filtration lution, coupled with immigration and population increases, • Providing and maintaining ecological niches for biodiversity, human culture • Biological dynamics; modulate atmospheric composition, CO2 sequestration shifted the nation’s demographic and political centers of grav- • Maintaining biodiversity; provision of food, fodder, shelter, medicines ity from their agrarian, rural roots to urban centers (Fig. 1). • Providing for pollination of crops and other plants, seed dispersal • Generating soil development; driving N, C cycles, sustains agriculture Demographic dynamics continued even to the end of the 20th • Storing and cycling essential nutrients century. For the first time in America’s history, the dominant • Absorbing and detoxifying pollutants, provides for waste treatment voting block in the 1992 presidential election shifted to sub- • Providing natural beauty, inspiration, and recreation urbia. Furthermore, the nation today is better educated (New- berger and Curry, 2000) and more environmentally astute (Bowman, 1996) than at anytime in its history. selves from the elements, feed ourselves by manipulating The character and structure of America’s agriculture also ecosystems and animal