2023年经济学人 诺亚方舟经济学(2)

（单词翻译）

    That led to what some conservationists might consider a repugnant conclusion: counterintuintively, the best way to preserve biodiversity is for the resource-constrained ark to pick a single species and squeeze in as many as possible.

    这就得出了一个自然保护者可能反感的结论：与直觉以为的相反，保护生物多样性的最佳方式是挑选一个物种，然后把这个物种尽可能多地塞进资源有限的方舟。

    Preventing just one type of animal from going extinct preserves not only what is distinct about that animal, but everything it shares genetically² with every other animal as well.

    防止某一种动物灭绝不仅能保护这种动物的独特性，也能保护它与其他所有动物共享的一切基因。

    Trying to keep two species alive, and failing, means losing everything.

    而试图维持两个物种的生存却失败，则意味着失去一切。

    The real-world implication of this is that using conservation funds on highly endangered species risks throwing good money after bad.

    这在现实世界中的含义是，把保护资金用于高度濒危物种会有让钱打水漂的风险。

    Pandas, for instance, are cute but require a lot of effort to keep alive.

    例如，熊猫很可爱，但需要人们付出很大的努力才能让熊猫活下去。

    Noah might be best to fill the ark with resilient cockroaches³ instead, ensuring that at least one creature makes it through the flood.

    诺亚不如把方舟里装满顽强的蟑螂，以确保至少有一种生物能挺过洪水。

    To reach that counterintuitive conclusion, Weitzman assumed that people ought to value biodiversity for its own sake.

    为了得出这一违反直觉的结论，魏茨曼假定人们应该珍视生物多样性本身。

    Some boatbuilders might instead want to focus only on the benefits animals provide to humans.

    相反，一些造船者可能只想关注动物给人类带来的好处。

    Perhaps a few creatures provide a sufficiently⁴ low or even negative value as to be excluded altogether.

    也许一些生物提供的价值太低，甚至是负面价值，以至于完全被排除在方舟之外。

    Stinging wasps⁵ are one candidate, but the picnic irritants play a vital role, eating other pests and pollinating flowers.

    会刺人的黄蜂是其中之一，但这种扰乱野餐的动物起着至关重要的作用，它们捕食其他害虫，并为花朵授粉。

    Mosquitoes, humans’ greatest natural killer⁶, responsible for more than half a million deaths a year, are another.

    另一种是蚊子，蚊子是人类最大的自然杀手，每年造成50多万人死亡。

    Some scientists have suggested releasing genetically modified, sterilised versions of the insects that would get rid of the species altogether; others warn that doing so could have unforeseen consequences by eradicating⁷ both a pollinator and a food source for other animals.

    一些科学家建议放出转基因的、绝育的蚊子，从而彻底消灭这一物种。另一些科学家警告说，这样做可能会产生不可预见的后果，因为其他动物的这一传粉者和食物来源都会消失。

    Deliberate eradications are occasionally successful.

    刻意根除物种偶尔是成功的。

    Every week the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Panamanian government drop sterilised screwworms, a parasitic⁸ flesh-eating fly larva that feeds on livestock⁹, out of a plane on the Panama-Colombia border in order to stop the creatures from breeding.

    每周，美国农业部和巴拿马政府都会在巴拿马和哥伦比亚边境用飞机投放绝育的螺旋虫（一种苍蝇幼虫，寄生且吃牲畜的活体组织），以阻止这种生物的繁殖。

    This helps maintain a biological barrier that prevents the creature from moving northward¹⁰, and thus safeguards a programme spanning decades and countries that has got rid of the fly from North America.

    这有助于维持一种生物屏障，阻止这种生物向北移动，从而维持了一个为期数十年、横跨多国的项目，这一项目使这种苍蝇在北美消失。

    The USDA estimates that the project produces economic benefits worth around $3.1bn a year.

    美国农业部估计，该项目每年产生的经济效益约为31亿美元。

    There is reason to be careful, though.

    不过，我们有理由保持谨慎。

    Even when valuing animals solely¹¹ on their benefits to humanity, biodiversity still has something to offer: insurance.

    即使仅仅根据动物对人类的益处来评估动物的价值，生物多样性也仍然有其用处：保险。

    Genetic¹ range reduces the vulnerability of any individual part of an ecosystem¹² to pests and diseases, helping¹³ avoid catastrophe¹⁴ if a species vital for human survival goes extinct.

    遗传多样性降低了生态系统中任何个体对害虫和疾病的易危性，如果对人类生存至关重要的某一物种灭绝，这可以防止灾难发生。

    Were Noah to have filled his ark with cockroaches—or pandas, for that matter—a single virus could have wiped out the lot.

    如果诺亚在他的方舟里装满了蟑螂--或者熊猫--一种病毒就可以把蟑螂全部消灭。

    Weitzmann himself applied¹⁵ such an approach to climate change, formulating¹⁶ his “dismal theorem”, which states that, in the presence of sufficiently big risks with a small chance of great harm, regular cost-benefit analysis is of little use.

    魏茨曼本人将这种方法应用于气候变化，并阐述了他的“悲观定理”，该定理指出，在存在概率小但伤害大的高风险情况下，常规的成本效益分析几乎没有什么用处。

    The same may be true of biodiversity.

    生物多样性可能也是如此。

    Deliberate extinctions are irreversible and reduce humanity’s options, so should be used sparingly.

    刻意灭绝是不可逆转的，而且会减少人类的选择，因此应该谨慎使用。

    Playing at being Noah is one thing, playing at being God quite another.

    扮演诺亚是一回事，扮演上帝则完全是另一回事。