1. The well-being and flourishing of human and non-human life
on Earth have value in themselves (synonyms: intrinsic value, inherent worth).
These values are independent of the usefulness of the non-human world
for human purposes.

This formulation refers to the ecosphere as a whole ("ecocentrism").
This includes individuals, species, populations, habitat, as well as human and
non-human cultures.  The term "life" is used here in a more comprehensive
non-technical way to also refer to what biologists classify as "non-living":
rivers (watersheds), landscapes, ecosystems.
 

2. Richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realization of
these values and are also values in themselves.

The so-called simple, lower or primitive species of plant and animal
contribute essentially to the richness and diversity of life.
They have value in themselves and are not merely steps toward
the so-called higher or rational life forms.  Life itself, as a process
over evolutionary time, implies an increase of diversity and richness.
 

3. Humans have no right to reduce this richness
and diversity except to satisfy vital needs.

The term "vital need" is deliberately left vague to allow for
considerable latitude in judgment.  Differences in climate and related factors,
together with differences in the structures or societies as they now exist,
need to be taken into consideration.
 

4. The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible
with a substantially smaller human population.
The flourishing of non-human life requires a smaller human population.

People in the materially richest countries cannot be expected to reduce
their excessive interference with the non-human world overnight.  The stabilization
and reduction of the human population will take time.  Hundreds of years!
Interim strategies need to developed.  But in no way does this excuse
the present complacency.  The extreme seriousness of our current situation
must first be realized.  And the longer we wait to make the necessary changes,
the more drastic will be the measures needed.  Until deep changes are made,
substantial decreases in richness and diversity are liable to occur:
the rate of extinction of species will be ten to one hundred or more times greater
than in any other short period of earth history.
 

5. Present human interference with the non-human world
is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening.

This formulation is mild.  For a realistic assessment, see the annual reports
of the Worldwatch Institute in Washington, DC.  The slogan of "non-interference"
does not imply that humans should not modify some ecosystems, as do other species.
Humans have modified the earth over their history and will probably continue to do so.
At issue is the nature and extent of such interference.  The per capita destruction
of wild (ancient) forests and other wild ecosystems has been excessive in rich countries;
it is essential that the poor do not imitate the rich in this regard.

The fight to preserve and extend areas of wilderness and near-wilderness
("free Nature") should continue.  The rationale for such preservation should focus
mainly on the ecological functions of these areas (one such function:
large wilderness areas are required in the biosphere for the continued
evolutionary speciation of plants and animals).  Most of the present
designated wilderness areas and game reserves
are not large enough to allow this to happen.
 

6. Policies must therefore be changed. These policies affect
basic economic, technological, and ideological structures.
The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from the present.

Economic growth as it is conceived of and implemented today by the industrial states
is incompatible with points 1 through 5.  There is only a faint resemblance between
ideal sustainable forms of economic growth and the present policies of
industrial societies.  Present ideologies tend to value things because they are scarce
and because they have a commodity value.  There is prestige in vast consumption
and waste.  Cultural diversity today requires advanced technology, that is,
techniques that advance the basic goals of each culture.  So-called soft, intermediate
and alternative technologies are steps in this direction.
 

7. The ideological change will be mainly that of appreciating
life quality (dwelling in situations of inherent value)
rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard of living.
There will be profound awareness of
the difference between bigness and greatness.

Some economists criticize the term "quality of life" because it is supposedly vague.
But, on closer inspection, what they consider to be vague is actually the
nonquantifiable nature of the term.  One cannot quantify adequately what is important
for the quality of life as discussed here, and there is no need to do so.
 

8. Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation,
directly or indirectly, to try to implement the necessary changes.

There is ample room for different opinions about priorities:  what should be done first;
what next?  What is the most urgent?  What is clearly necessary to be done,
as opposed to what is highly desirable but not absolutely pressing?
The frontier of the environmental crisis is long and varied, and there is a place for everyone.