UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

The Extinction-Resurrection Paradox: Connecting Species Extinction and Resurrection to Criminology

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.54555/ccjls.14726.172017

Auteurs

James Gacek · Jared R. Dmello · Amin Asfari

Année déclarée

2026

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

article

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:04:47.772700+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-09T19:04:47.772700+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

The University of Adelaide · University of Regina

Pays d’affiliation déclarés

AU · CA

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

We are living in an era of extinction the likes of which we have never seen before. There is no doubt that with the profound impacts on ecosystems, extinction remains a persistent issue. Questions of biodiversity have drawn significant attention in environmental ethics, yet there has been scant attention paid to it within criminology. Importantly, the main question we pose is as follows: as resurrection becomes increasingly possible, does it incentivize extinction? Drawing upon the environmental ethics and criminological literatures, we explore the ongoing challenges of extinction and resurrection, specifically how to both define and operationalize the terms and their complexities. Following on, we bridge extinction studies with criminology to produce critical insights into varied concerns related to the risk and harm produced by and through extinction and resurrection. We then bring together these challenges with our discussion of the extinction-resurrection paradox, a term we coin to refer to the potentially contradictory efforts to reconcile biodiversity conservation with the potentially risky and harmful considerations that resurrection (and advances towards a resurrection ‘industry’) poses. We believe the extinction-resurrection paradox is important to describe the current realities of the shifting relationship between humans, nonhumans, and nature. We contend our discussion of the paradox provides a useful, conceptual entry point for the analysis of species extinction and resurrection, and we conclude by arguing that the case for considering extinction and resurrection remain timely and warranted matters of criminological concern.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

W7215086907

DOI

10.54555/ccjls.14726.172017

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Doctrine

Types déclarés par les sources

article

Entités naturelles mentionnées

Écosystème · Espèce

Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.

Sources

OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.54555/ccjls.14726.172017
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W7215086907

Relations bibliographiques documentées

Références et liens déclarés par les sources ; ils ne constituent pas une preuve juridique ni une qualification UGLC. Affichage limité à 20 références sortantes.

• openalex:w1665697783 · CITES
• openalex:w1977122562 · CITES
• openalex:w1978993184 · CITES
• openalex:w2004606257 · CITES
• openalex:w2008083428 · CITES
• openalex:w2008757903 · CITES
• openalex:w2009941331 · CITES
• openalex:w2018643527 · CITES
• openalex:w2019378970 · CITES
• openalex:w2038591935 · CITES
• openalex:w2062931786 · CITES
• openalex:w2084404341 · CITES
• openalex:w2092480259 · CITES
• openalex:w2119214243 · CITES
• openalex:w2139274755 · CITES
• openalex:w2144701430 · CITES
• openalex:w2158558267 · CITES
• openalex:w2159887708 · CITES
• openalex:w2190253839 · CITES
• openalex:w2275194435 · CITES

0 références entrantes au sein du corpus détecté

Statut documentaire

Pertinence à examiner

Bibliothèque

Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.