When Extinction is Warranted: Invasive Species, Suppression-Drives, and the Worst-Case Scenario

Ethics, Policy and Environment:1-21 (forthcoming)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Most current techniques to deal with invasive species are ineffective or have highly damaging side effects. To this end suppression-drives based on clustered regularly inter-spaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR/Cas9) have been touted as a potential silver bullet for the problem, allowing for a highly focused, humane and cost-effective means of removing a target species from an environment. Suppression-drives come with serious risks, however, such that the precautionary principle seems to warrant us not deploying this technology. The focus of this paper is on one such risk – the danger of a suppression-drive escaping containment and wiping out the target species globally. Here, I argue that in most cases this risk is significant enough to warrant not using a gene-drive. In some cases, however, we can bypass the precautionary principle by using an approach that hinges on what I term the ‘Worst-Case Clause’. This clause, in turn, provides us with a litmus test that can be fruitfully used to determine what species are viable targets for suppression-drives in the wild. Using this metric in concert with other considerations, I suggest that only three species are currently possible viable targets – the European rabbit, ship rat and Caribbean Tree Frog.
Categories
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
THRWEI-2
Upload history
Archival date: 2020-11-29
View other versions
Added to PP index
2020-11-10

Total views
58 ( #55,977 of 65,614 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
13 ( #48,180 of 65,614 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.