Should governments prioritize economic growth and human development over the preservation of untouched natural circumstances?

Should we turn Niagara Falls into a giant exuberant multimillion-dollar enterprise? This question may seem far-fetched, but the tension between economic growth and preserving untouched natural environments has been central to human governance since its beginnings.

In this article, I argue that governments should prioritize the preservation of untouched natural environments over economic growth and human development, because nature has intrinsic value beyond its utility for humans. Additionally, from a conservationist perspective, human development often disrupts balanced ecosystems that are essential for long-term human health and sustainability.

Nature's worth is independent of human utility. When nature is reduced to a resource, we see it as merely a means to an end. This should not be the way we view nature, because its moral worth can stem from simply existing, not from serving humans. However, the instrumental value of nature, or idea that nature is worth protecting for the material ends it offers, is distinct from the intrinsic value it offers. One can recognize the intrinsic value of nature through perceiving that value through spiritual connection.

Transcendentalist Ralph Waldo Emerson held that untouched nature has intrinsic spiritual value. Emerson believed that nature is a divine body: "The greatest delight…is the suggestion of an occult relation between man and the vegetable. I am not alone and unacknowledged. They nod to me, and I to them. The waving of the boughs in the storm, is new to me and old" (Emerson 8). In this way, humans can exist in harmony with nature. Through recognizing this value, humans can attune themselves to a value that exists independently in nature. The spiritual experience is the means by which we recognize nature's worth. He emphasizes this idea when stating that "Nothing is quite beautiful alone: nothing but is beautiful in the whole" (Emerson 8). This interconnectedness is itself what gives nature its independent worth, not its service to any one part of the whole. Emerson’s philosophy is key to understanding why governments often fail to recognize the ethical value of untouched nature: a government’s role is human-centric.

The disagreement between the preservation of nature and development is evident in cultural representations of nature. 19th century Hudson River School painter Asher Brown Durand's 1853 painting Progress (The Advance of Civilization) depicts a landscape transforming from wild, Native American-inhabited terrain to an industrialized, settled valley. While the painting's title suggests celebration of economic expansion, the work itself can be read as documenting loss - a visual record of what vanishes when development takes precedence. These paintings became symbols for early preservation movements and recognizing the intrinsic value of nature, demonstrating that nature holds collective meaning beyond economic value. The painting reminds us that preservation can unite people around shared values.

That’s why although nature’s worth is independent of human utility, its usefulness to humans provides an additional reason for governments to prioritize preservation over excessive economic expansion. For one, preserving biodiversity and ecosystems serves human interests. By maintaining ecological balance, untouched natural environments support human health and long-term sustainability. These benefits include clean water, natural flood control, and protection against some impacts of climate change. An example is natural urban wetlands, like swamps around human urban areas, that help cities adapt to extreme weather events, such as in Laos, by controlling water flow and filtration. Greater biodiversity enables humans to preserve healthy relationships with nature and avoid depletion of resources through overfishing or overhunting. 

Indigenous populations demonstrate this principle through their preservation practices that help to maintain biodiversity. Since knowledge is passed down across generations, Indigenous communities often hold long-term knowledge that research cannot easily replicate. A meta-analysis of climatic changes showed that Indigenous communities can offer about 50 years’ worth of insights into climate change effects. Local knowledge ranges from observations on sea-level rise to shifting rainfall patterns, to animal behavior and ice conditions (Walderman 2025). Although they make up 5% of the global population, Indigenous people protect 80% of Earth’s remaining biodiversity (WEF 2023). The health of human civilization depends on these balanced ecosystems.

After all, the U.S. saw a record number of flash floods in 2025, including the deadly July floods in Texas. Carbon pollution intensifies rainfall extremes and inland flood hazards through climate change (Climate Central 2025). Ironically, what appears to be a sacrifice of economic opportunity in the short term becomes an investment in humanity's future well-being. History shows that civilizations that exhaust their natural resources ultimately face collapse, while those that work within ecological limits endure. Thus, we see that even from a human-centric approach, it is of our best interest to maintain Earth’s natural resources. 

Some may argue that economic growth and human development constitute the government's primary responsibility. After all, governments exist to improve citizens' material conditions, create jobs, and build infrastructure that enhances quality of life. From this perspective, untouched wilderness represents missed opportunities for housing, agriculture, mining, or tourism revenue. Developing nations, especially, face pressure to exploit natural resources to lift populations out of poverty. Moreover, human needs seem more urgent than abstract notions of nature's intrinsic value.

However, a government should act as a body through which people collectively determine their values and priorities. According to a 2025 Gallup poll, nearly six in 10 Americans, 57%, think the U.S. government is doing too little to protect the environment. If citizens decide that preserving nature matters to them, democratic governments should reflect that choice. Furthermore, viewing environmental preservation as separate from human welfare ignores the reality that human health and prosperity depend on functioning ecosystems including having access to clean water and food systems. Governments that ignore both this public consensus and ecological reality in favor of economic expansion are therefore failing their democratic and ethical obligations.

On the practical side, if we exploit our planet to the point where it has no more resources to give, the economic costs will far exceed any short-term gains. According to a 2026 IPBES report, over $7 trillion in global finance flows had direct negative impacts on nature in 2023 alone (IPBES 2026). This has made biodiversity loss a critical systemic risk threatening financial stability and human wellbeing. True progress requires recognizing that human flourishing and ecological health are inseparable.

Ultimately, we must reframe our understanding of "progress." Durand's painting shows one version of progress. Perhaps genuine progress means learning to thrive within ecological limits rather than pursuing constant territorial expansion and environmental degradation. To preserve untouched natural environments means that governments don’t obstruct true progress but rather allow future generations to inherit a world where progress remains possible.

---

Works Cited

Bedell, Rebecca. "Asher Durand's Progress Reconsidered." Panorama: Journal of the Association of Historians of American Art, vol. 5, no. 1, Spring 2019, journalpanorama.org/article/durands-progress/.

EMERSON, RW, et al. “The Project Gutenberg eBook of Nature, by Ralph Waldo Emerson.” Project Gutenberg, https://www.gutenberg.org/files/29433/29433-h/29433-h.htm#1. Accessed 8 March 2026.

"Five Things to Know About Climate Change in 2025." Climate Central, 10 Dec. 2025, www.climatecentral.org/climate-matters/five-things-to-know-about-climate-change-in-2025.

“Here's how Indigenous people are protecting the planet | World Economic Forum.” The World Economic Forum, 7 August 2023, https://www.weforum.org/stories/2023/08/indigenous-people-protecting-planet/. Accessed 8 March 2026.

“IPBES: Four key takeaways on how nature loss threatens the global economy.” Carbon Brief, 9 February 2026, https://www.carbonbrief.org/ipbes-four-key-takeaways-on-how-nature-loss-threatens-the-global-economy/. Accessed 8 March 2026.

Walderman, Ava, and Shaundra Branova. "Indigenous Knowledge: Connecting Data, Land and Story." American Society for Microbiology, 25 Nov. 2025, asm.org/articles/2025/november/indigenous-knowledge-connecting-data,-land-and-sto.