Elena Casetta

This open access book features essays written by philosophers, biologists, ecologists and conservation scientists facing the current biodiversity crisis. Despite increasing communication, accelerating policy and management responses, and notwithstanding improving ecosystem assessment and endangered species knowledge, conserving biodiversity continues to be more a concern than an accomplished task. Why is it so?The overexploitation of natural resources by our species is a frequently recognised factor, while the short-term economic interests of governments and stakeholders typically clash with the burdens that implementing conservation actions imply. But this is not the whole story. This book develops a different perspective on the problem by exploring the conceptual challenges and practical defiance posed by conserving biodiversity, namely: on the one hand, the difficulties in defining what biodiversity is and characterizing that “thing” to which the word ‘biodiversity’ refers to; on the other hand, the reasons why assessing biodiversity and putting in place effective conservation actions is arduous.

If natural kinds were defined on the basis of fixed and immutable essences, then – with the end of essentialism in life sciences – their end, at least for those kinds confined to the living realm, would ensue as well (1-2). If appropriately revised and adapted, however, natural kinds may still play an important theoretical role, not only for the sake of philosophical speculation, but also in accomodating scientific practices and in providing an adequate rendering of human reasoning. The proposal outlined in this paper moves from the historical and disjunctive solutions of Millikan and Boyd, but it departs from them in that it offers a conventionalist interpretation of natural kinds. The bulk of the theory is presented through the case study of the distinction between sexes and genders (3). A few remarks on how to further the proposal are offered in the final section (4).

Despite increasing communication, accelerating policy and management responses, and notwithstanding improving ecosystem assessment and endangered species knowledge, conserving biodiversity continues to be more a concern than an accomplished task. Why is it so? The overexploitation of natural resources by our species is a frequently recognised factor, while the short-term economic interests of governments and stakeholders typically clash with the burdens that implementing conservation actions imply. But this is not the whole story. A different perspective on the problem shall here be considered, by exploring the conceptual and practical challenges posed by conserving biodiversity.

In recent years, we have assisted to an impressive effort to identify and catalogue biodiversity at the microbial level across a wide range of environments, human bodies included (e.g., skin, oral cavity, intestines). This effort, fostered by the decreasing cost of DNA sequencing, highlighted not only the vast diversity at the microbial level but also the importance of cells’ social interactions, potentially leading to the emergence of novel diversity. In this contribution, we shall argue that entities other than species, and in particular multispecies biofilms, might play a crucial—and still underestimated—role in increasing biodiversity as well as in conserving it. In particular, after having discussed how microbial diversity impacts ecosystems (Sect. 9.1), we argue (Sect. 9.2) that multispecies biofilms may increase biodiversity at both the genetic and phenotypic level. In Sect. 9.3 we discuss the possibility that multispecies biofilms, both heterotrophic and autotrophic, are evolutionary individuals, i.e. units of selection. In the conclusion, we highlight a major limitation of the traditional species-based approach to biodiversity origination and conservation.