Last Haven: Valuing Nature and Human Priorities

Imagine a green space that is the last habitat for an endangered species, like tigers. Now, what if you heard that the government plans to destroy or change this space to start an agricultural project that could bring in a lot of money? How would you react to this news?

Would your feelings change if the space was going to be used to build the first hospital or the first mental health unit in the area? What if the endangered species were snakes, certain plants, or tiny organisms instead of tigers?

Now consider if the situation were reversed: instead of a green space being converted for human good, an existing human-built space is going to be torn down for the good of non-humankinds: A hospital removed to create a habitat for endangered species. How would you react now?

These dilemmas are the core interest behind the “Last Haven” project. Decisions about preserving habitats for endangered species often conflict with human needs and desires, such as economic development, medical advancements, or community needs. This project investigates the complex choices, values and trade-offs involved in such decisions and where people draw the line between prioritizing human vs non-human needs and interests.