In this final essay in my series on de-extinction, I set out 15 questions surrounding justification, feasibility, likelihood of success and negative impacts, and public acceptance that can be used to assess the suitability of a de-extinction candidate species. I then use these criteria to evaluate the woolly mammoth, passenger pigeon, thylacine, dodo, and aurochs. From my analysis, I conclude that the passenger pigeon and aurochs are the most suitable for de-extinction while the woolly mammoth, thylacine, and dodo are less suitable, although all species have issues and require further research and development, especially regarding animal welfare and the likelihood of success and negative impacts.

De-extinction is a complicated and divisive topic with potential benefits and drawbacks and a great amount of uncertainty. This essay takes a holistic look at the de-extinction debate, discussing the ways in which de-extinction could help our planet and the species that live here as well as the various risks involved in practicing the discipline. Due to the relatively theoretical nature of current de-extinction literature, this essay emphasises the uncertainty in evaluating the benefits and risks of any one de-extinction project.

De-extinction is the science of resurrecting extinct species, or their characteristics, through backbreeding, cloning or genetic engineering. This essay, the first in a three-part series, discusses these three techniques, the advantages and disadvantages of each, and how they have been applied to the field of de-extinction.