Carleton College
Spring 2005
SOAN 244:
Biodiversity conservation and development
Tuesday and Thursday
Leighton 402
(3:10-4:55pm)
Instructor:
Office
Phone
E-mail
Office hours
Tsegaye Nega
Goodsell 105
646-5713
tnega@carleton.edu
1-2:30pm Tue. & Thu/ or by appointment.
Course Description
The primary objective of this seminar is to spark critical enquiry on the subject of
conservation and development, which have become a central concern for policy makers,
scientists, local communities, governmental and nongovernmental organizations, and
international organizations around the world. All of these actors are concerned in
answering the following question: How can the need for intensive human social and
economic development be reconciled with the conservation of biodiversity? This course
explores the wide range of actions these actors take at a local, national, and international
level to address this question. We will examine various approaches to conservation and
development issues, including traditional, protectionist, community-based, and marketbased approaches to conservation and development as well as trace contemporary debates
about them across a spectrum of cultures in North America, Africa, Latin America, and
Asia.
There are many possible ways of approaching the subject matter that have swirled around
the problematic of conservation and development. One standard format might be to
follow a strictly social science theoretical perspective (e.g., political ecology) and show
that conservation and development problems in the Third World are neither a question of
resource scarcity nor overpopulation nor ignorance but the result of the ways in which the
individual ‘land manager’ is articulated with global political and economic forces. An
alternative format might be to follow a strictly natural science theoretical perspective
(e.g., conservation biology) and show the problem of overpopulation and resource
scarcity to argue for the irreconcilability of conservation and development.
In this seminar, I want to take a somewhat more interdisciplinary—but what I hope is
more provocative and insightful—approach than tracing the above long established
academic blinkers and slit trenches between political ecology and conservation biology,
between those whose motto is “no nature without social justice” and those whose motto is
“no humanity without justice to nature.” I am not altogether saying that we will abandon
these approaches, which pedagogically, have merits; but I intend to trouble both
approaches to conservation and development by mapping their terrain of operations in a
somewhat more historicist, adventurous and unconventional manner. I hope you enjoy
the rough and unexpected journey I have planned for the course.
Course objectives:
As a result of taking this course, students will:




Critically examine key concepts, including development, conservation, nature, culture
Demonstrate a working knowledge of the major approaches to conservation and
development, and the debates between these different positions
Develop a critical perspective on major approaches to conservation and development,
and have the initial knowledge necessary to develop and justify their own positions
Advance an alternative, interdisciplinary concepts for understanding and addressing
conservation and development problems
Course requirements
The course is organized as a seminar. This means that in addition to do the readings in a
timely way and attend class, you are expected to complete the following:
Class participation—15%: To encourage your preparation on assigned readings, you are
required to come to each Tuesday session with one or two typed page that outlines what
you thought were the key insights from the readings for that session and a list of two or
three well thought out discussion questions that you think would be fruitful to pursue
further in class. I will randomly call on people every Tuesday to offer their insights and
discussion questions. I will collect the weekly summaries at the end of class session. Do
make an effort to make a good summary, for in addition to making sure you keep up with
assigned readings, it will ultimately also help you prepare for the final exam. Your
seminar grade will reflect the consistency of your attendance, the quality of your
participation in class, and your demonstrated preparation in the collected summaries.
Writing assignment 1—10%: What kind of ‘nature’ are we conserving? This may sound
a trivial question, but how we understand nature has tremendous implication on how we
go about making conservation decisions. Indeed, it is perhaps one of the most important
concepts that we will explore in the course. Your task in this assignment is to write a 5
page reflective essay discussing how the readings on the concept of nature have
challenged your views.
Writing assignment 2—40%: Research paper. Select a local, regional, national or
international conservation and development problem that you know about or has been in
the news, that interests you, and that you feel is important, and connect it to relevant
issues raised in the course readings, as well as to pertinent secondary sources (which
must include at least 5 academic sources). This will involve a brief review of the problem
and how it has been discussed, but it will focus on your analysis of the differing
perspectives on conservation and development at stake and the possible alternatives.
This project can be approached individually or in pairs. If you choose to work in pairs,
obviously the expectations are twice as high. Grades will be given evenly to group
partners, so it is your responsibility to ensure that it is a shared and even endeavor.
This project will involve four stages:
1) Formative Proposal (due in class April 19) indicating preliminary research outline,
lines of exploration, and a working bibliography. This is to get you moving on the topic,
give you constructive feedback at an early stage, and help you focus your topic if need be
(you are also encouraged to discuss proposed topic with me prior to the initial proposal).
The proposal will count for 5% of the 40% total assignment grade.
2) Draft paper. A draft of your term paper is due May 19, which will be given to
three of your peers for review (I will assign who the reviewers will be). The review will
consist of providing (1) a detailed comment on all aspect of the paper in the text itself and
(2) a one page summary that outlines the reviewers overall comment on the paper. The
review is due May 24. The draft paper will count for 10% of the 40% total assignment
grade.
3) Class presentation. Give a 10-15 minute presentation of your research to the class
on May 31. The presentation will count for 5% of the 40% total assignment grade.
2) Final Document (due in class May 31) Length: 10 double spaced pages for
individual, 16 pages for pairs (not counting references). The paper will be evaluated
based on the quality of the introduction, clarity of the thesis, support for the argument,
analysis, creativity, style (organization, grammar, and concision of writing), and
conclusions. The final paper will count for 20% of the 50% total assignment grade.
Final Exam – 35%
The final exam will be based on essay questions, covering the course lectures,
seminars, and readings. You will be asked to answer 2 questions in 2 hours. You will be
given a choice of 5 questions to choose from. The intent is to give you a chance to
demonstrate your understanding of the key concepts and theories discussed in class, and
your ability to analyze them. A more detailed instructions and study questions will be
given as the exam approaches.
Schedule of readings
A. The misadventures of development and the rise of modern conservation
March 29: Introduction and course overview
Truman, Harry S. 1949. The Inaugural address of Harry S. Truman. January 20.
Available at: http://trumanlibrary.org/calendar/viewpapers.php?pid=1030
March 31: Anatomy of “development” or the conquest of nature
Sachs, Wolfgang. 2000. Development: the rise and fall of an ideal. Wuppertal Institute
for Climate, Environment, and Energy.
April 5: The betrayal of development
Norgaard, Richard. 1994. Development betrayed: the end of progress and a
coevolutionary revisioning of the future. Routledge, chapters 1, 6, and 7.
April 7: The search for a new view of nature I
Botkin, Daniel. 1990. Discordant harmonies: a new ecology for the twenty-first century.
Oxford University Press. Chapters 1, 5, 6, and 7.
Optional
Cronon, William. 1995. The trouble with wilderness or, getting back to the wrong
nature. In William Cronon (ed.) Uncommon ground: rethinking the human place in
nature. W.W. Norton, pp. 69-90.
April 12: The search for a new view of nature II
Latour, Bruno. 2004. Politics of nature: how to bring the sciences into democracy.
Harvard University Press, pp. 9-52.
Descola Philips. 1996. Constructing natures: symbolic ecology and social practice, In
Descola, Philips & Gisli Palsson (eds), Nature and society: anthropological
perspectives. Rutledge, pp. 82-102.
Agrawal, A. 1995. Dismantling the divide between indigenous and scientific knowledge.
Development and Change, 26: 413-439.
B. Reconciling conservation and development
April 14: conservation and development as a co-evolutionary process
Norgaard, Richard. 1994. Development betrayed: the end of progress and a
coevolutionary revisioning of the future. Routledge, chapters 2, 3, and 4.
April 19:
Norgaard, Richard. 1994. Development betrayed: the end of progress and a
coevolutionary revisioning of the future. Routledge, chapters 8, 9 and 10.
Interlude: the genesis of reconciling conservation and development
April 21: Yellowstone, the oldest conservation and development project I
Chase, Alstair. 1987. Playing God in Yellowstone: the destruction of America’s first
national park. (selections)
April 26: Yellowstone, the oldest conservation and development project II
Chase, Alstair. 1987. Playing God in Yellowstone: the destruction of America’s first
national park. (selections)
Three prevailing approaches to reconciling conservation and development
1. Leave it to experts: Fortress conservation
April 28: The Third World and national parks: extending the Yellowstone model
Van Schaik, C., J. Terborgh, and B. Dugelby. 1997. The silent crisis: the state of
rainforest nature preserves. In Kramer Randall et al (eds.), Last stand: protected
areas & the defense of tropical biodiversity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 6489.
May 3:
Terborgh, J. 1999. Why conservation in the tropics is failing. In Requiem for nature.
Island Press. (On closed reserve)
Terborgh, J. and Mario A. Boza. 2002. Internationalization of nature conservation. In
Terborgh et al (eds.), Making parks work: strategies for preserving tropical nature.
Island Press. pp. 383-394.
Bruner, A. et al. 2001. Effectiveness of parks in protecting tropical biodiversity. Science,
291: 125-128.
May 5
Peluso, Nancy. 1993. 'Coercing conservation? The politics of state resource control.
Global Environmental Change 3(2): 199-217
Guha, Ramachandra. 2002. The authoritarian biologist and the arrogance of antihumanism: wildlife conservation in the Third World. The Ecologist. Vol. 27 (1).
Guha, Ramachandra. 1989. Radical American environmentalism and Wilderness
preservation: A Third World critique. Environmental Ethics: 11 (1).
2. Leave it to people: Community-based conservation
May 10
Ghimire, K. & Michel Pimbert. 1997. Social change and conservation: an overview of
issues and concepts. In Krishna Ghimire & Michel Pimbert (eds.), Social change and
conservation. Earthscan Publications (pp. 1-38).
Arun Agrawal and Clark C. Gibson. 1999. Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role
of Community in Natural Resource Conservation, World Development, Volume 27,
Issue 4, Pages 629-649.
Western D. 1994. Ecosystem conservation and rural development: the case of Amboseli.
In Western, David, R. Michel Wright, and Shirley C. Strum (eds.). 1994. Natural
connections: perspectives on community-based conservation. Island Press. (pp. 1452).
May 12
Metcalfe, Simon. 1994. The Zimbabwe Communal Areas Management Programme for
Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE). In Western, David, R. Michel Wright, and
Shirley C. Strum (eds.). 1994. Natural connections: perspectives on community-based
conservation. Island Press. (pp. 161-192).
May 17: Workshop: assessing community-based conservation
Adams, W.M.& D. Hulme. If community conservation is the answer in Africa, what is
the question? Oryx, 35 (3): 193-200.
Songorwa, A.N. 1999. Community-based wildlife management (CWM) in Tanzania: are
communities interested? World Development 27: 2061-79.
Emerton, L. 2001. The nature of benefits and the benefits of nature: why wildlife
conservation has not economically benefited communities in Africa. In D.Hulme and
M. Murphee (eds.), African wildlife and livelihoods: the promise and performance of
community conservation. James Currey, Oxford and Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH.
3. Leave it to the market: Market—based conservation
May 19: Private parks
Langholz, Jeff. 1996. Economics, Objectives, and Success of Private Nature Reserves in
Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America. Conservation Biology, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp.
271-280
Langholz , J. A. & James P. Lassoie. 2001. Perils and Promise of Privately Owned
Protected Areas. Bioscience, vol. 51:12
May 24: Bioprospecting
Kerry Ten Kate, Sarah A. Laird. 2003. The Commercial Use of Biodiversity: Access to
Genetic Resources and Benefit Sharing. Earthscan Publications (selections)
Perry, B. 2000. The fate of the collections: social justice and the annexation of plant
genetic resources. In Charles Zerner (ed.), People, Plants and Justice. Columbia
University Press, pp. 374-402
May 26: synthesis
Norgaard, Richard. 1994. Development betrayed: the end of progress and a
coevolutionary revisioning of the future. Routledge, chapters 11 and 12.
May 31
Student project presentation