Paper 2 topic – Using Political Ecology to examine the human component of the
tension between conservation and development
The main goal of this paper is for you to practice identifying and explaining the “relevant
truth” in a conservation issue. As we’ve read and discussed in class, the relevant truth is
the truth that brings about change in ecosystem dynamics and causes an ecological
ricochet... i.e. whatever (instrument/ideology/knowledge/???) ultimately shapes access to
and control over non-human systems & in doing alters ecosystem dynamics.
1) Read one of the following chapters in Liberation Ecologies:




Ch 3 – Invisible Forests (pp. 64 – 103)
Ch. 4 – Soil Degradation in Bolivia (pp. 107 – 124)
Ch. 5 – Purity and Pollution (pp. 125 – 165)
Ch. 12 – Gender Conflict in the Gambian Wetlands (pp. 316 – 336)
2) Using specific examples from authors we’ve read in class and at least 2 outside
sources (such as Economist, NY Times, National Geographic, or possibly even another
scholarly article or chapter), write a 5-7 page paper in which you make an original
argument about the “relevant truth” of the conservation/development issue in the chapter
you read. I expect you to address the following points (-s) in your paper.
1 page – Body
- Introduce case study you read about & the author’s main argument
- Identify the relevant truth in the chapter you read.
- What is the nature of the ecological ricochet catalyzed by this relevant truth?
3 ½ - 4 pages - Body
- How is the relevant truth revealed in the case you read about? (By looking at
policy instruments? By looking at people’s actions? By looking at embedded
knowledge? By examining the case in a broader political economic context?
By looking at _______?)
o Things to consider if you would like suggestions on how to
structure your argument:
 How does embedded/ethnoecological/barstool knowledge
shape or not shape the relevant truth (and the subsequent
ecological ricochet) in the chapter?
 This is a good place to bring in authors we’ve read in class &
to bring in outside sources to clarify your argument about the
relevant truth.
 How do politics shape the relevant truth? What kind?
- How does the relevant truth lead to the ecological ricochet?
1/2 page – Conclusion
- Summarize your main points
3). Your assignment is to make an original argument about the relevant truth in your
chosen chapter. To do this you will need to bring in information from outside sources to
give you additional perspective on the case study described in the chapter.
4) In addition to the 5-7 page paper, include a bibliography at the end of your paper. Cite
authors in text when you use their ideas – e.g. (Ward 2005). If in doubt, cite.
5) DUE NOVEMBER 9th – 3 paragraphs briefly explaining the argument you plan to
make about the following components of your paper.
- Paragraph 1 - case study
- Paragraph 2 - relevant truth
- Paragraph 3 – ecological ricochet.
This assignment will be worth 1 quiz grade & must be typed. LATE
PARAGRAPHS NOT ACCEPTED – NO EXCEPTIONS. WORK AHEAD.
6) PAPER IS DUE MONDAY, NOVEMBER 21 at the beginning of class. E-mailed
assignments will not be accepted. Papers lose 5% off of final grade per day they are late
(i.e. not in my box in Guggenheim in paper form, signed in by the secretary). Beginning
at 11:01 am on Nov. 21 papers are considered one day late. If they are not in my box by
8am on Tuesday Nov. 22, they are 2 days late, and so on. Papers over a week late will
not be accepted.