Sensing inequity: technological solutionism, biodiversity conservation, and environmental DNA
Environmental DNA (eDNA) has risen in popularity as a genetically-based method to enumerate species in natural ecosystems, and it is well positioned to be integrated into biodiversity monitoring and conservation initiatives. While the field has made great strides in methodological development, it ha...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | BioSocieties 2024-09, Vol.19 (3), p.501-525 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Environmental DNA (eDNA) has risen in popularity as a genetically-based method to enumerate species in natural ecosystems, and it is well positioned to be integrated into biodiversity monitoring and conservation initiatives. While the field has made great strides in methodological development, it has largely avoided discussion of its potential inequitable social outcomes. In this paper, we argue that the social asymmetries of eDNA are under-addressed precisely because of how it is framed and valued by powerful actors who may benefit from the technology’s proliferation. We use a framework of representational rhetorics to articulate the discursive process by which the biodiversity crisis is distilled into problems of data-deficiency and inefficiency in scientific articles such that eDNA offers the exact corresponding technological solution. This framing helps justify eDNA’s implementation in local, global, and corporate spheres, despite the methodology’s uncertainties and limitations. It may also enable future inequitable outcomes through sidelining other forms of biodiversity knowledge and enclosing biodiversity information through processes of genetic commodification and privatization. We engage with critiques of neoliberal conservation, big data, and (biodiversity) genomics made by political ecologists and feminist science and technology studies scholars to help reorient the eDNA field towards more equity-oriented discursive practices and implementations. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1745-8552 1745-8560 |
DOI: | 10.1057/s41292-023-00315-w |