The term shifting baselines has expanded its horizons.
In an interview with MPA News, Tim McClanahan of the Wildlife Conservation Society uses the term in reference to major changes in thinking about conservation and poverty reduction. Much the way our personal baselines versus historical baselines ask us to re-think our definition of conservation, we are now asked to re-think conservation as strictly science based. Poverty plays a key role, but just what and how much is debatable. No one said this would be easy.
Check it out: November 2004 MPA News lead story, quote below is on page 2...
McClanahan says there is a shifting baseline not only for the state of nature but also for what we consider to be conservation. "This will trouble those of us who would like to see the maintenance of indigenous biodiversity and self-organizing ecosystems," he says. "We like to imagine that by assisting both the poor and nature that we will ultimately triumph. But this is naive. We need to work beyond the good feelings and dissect the relationship to develop a long-term functional relationship that does not compromise biodiversity. Ultimately an objective measure of success is needed, which is the state of indigenous biodiversity and ecological processes."
-- Mike Misner