LAUSR

In the face of massive human impacts upon the environment, a prevailing attitude among Australian ecologists seems to have become one of pessimism. The essay explores the consequences of this stance. Pessimism arises understandably from personal values favouring care for the natural world under conditions of rapid global change. Expression of such values is in no way illegitimate; pessimism is as justifiable a perspective as is optimism when interpreting ecology. Examples are mentioned of areas of Australian ecology where pessimism does not predominate, and where the ecological changes being wrought by the Anthropocene are accepted. But, the predominance of gloom can cause ecologists to flirt with exaggeration and with misanthropy, and perversely it can cause them to strive to prevent ecological change even though the discipline is rooted in the reality of flux. Most profoundly, it causes many citizens to switch off: gloom has limited capacity to motivate, whereas hope is the elixir of action. Because of predominant negativity, we risk losing the confidence of society. The solution is for the discipline to develop more diverse strands of interpretation, characterized by more equal doses of acceptance and hope. By balancing dejection, ecology may achieve the efficacy in debate and decision-making that it warrants in these challenging times.