Abstract

Abstract:Environmental ethics and policy have been largely developed around the concept of nature as a dynamic collection of living beings in direct interaction with humans. However, when we consider the Moon, Mars, and other worlds we encounter profoundly static and lifeless nature with essentially no history of human interaction. On what basis do we make decisions on the preservation or utilization of such lifeless landscapes? Here I suggest that static lifeless landscapes on other worlds have some parallels on Earth in the upper elevations of the Antarctic Dry Valleys and the central depression of the Atacama Desert in Chile and Peru. In the soil of both locations life is absent or cannot grow and the timescales of landscape evolution vastly exceed human timescales. For all intents and purposes, these are static and lifeless landscapes. Today, human activities in Antarctica are carefully regulated with a view toward preservation while in the Atacama Desert resource mining has extensively altered the landscape. Thus, these two sites provide alternate possible futures for the Moon and Mars. Preservation of static lifeless landscapes could be based on two attributes. First, they provide a way to further define and understand the Earth and the limits of life—which is the current scientific motivation for biological and geological research activities there. Second, both on Earth and particularly on other worlds, lifeless landscapes may express states that are new to human experience akin to new forms of art or new branches of science. We don't understand these environments, their nature, or their relationship to us. In the case of Mars there may come to be a tension between preserving a lifeless landscape and introducing or enhancing life on that planet.