If an ecosystem has no goals of its own, who decides when it's stopped working?

Published on 18 June 2026, the piece moves past the headlines of collapsing currents and dying reefs to ask a deeper philosophical question. It explores why the language of "ecosystem services"—treating nature like a machine that can break—might be conceptually flawed. While it is common to view the Amazon as the planet's lungs, the text argues that ecosystems do not actually have goals or intrinsic purposes. By untangling the philosophy of science from conservation politics, the piece suggests that responsibility for a changing world lies with human values, rather than a malfunctioning nature.

A philosophical and historical examination of the concept of ecosystem function and the scientific validity of describing natural systems as malfunctioning. Traces the evolution of ecological thought from the 19th century to contemporary natural-capital accounting, distinguishing between objective processes and human-centered goals. Evaluates the implications of using the language of purpose in environmental policy and examines the values that drive ecological restoration.

Read at source: The Guardian (Long Read)