Conflict and engagement: An empirical study of a farmer-extension partnership in a sustainable agriculture program

Stakeholder engagement is a crucial concept of extension education. Engagement expresses democratic values of the land-grant mission by providing opportunities for stakeholders to influence program planning, including setting the agenda and negotiating resource allocations. In practice, the concept of engagement guides the formation of partnerships among extension, communities, industry, and government. In the area of sustainable agriculture, however, stakeholders may conflict, presenting challenges to the engagement process. Results from a study of a Canadian sustainable agriculture program, produced using cultural anthropology and participatory action research, detail challenges of the engagement process that led to reconstruction of a farmer-extension partnership. Notable in the early phase of the reconstruction process were critical reflection, stakeholder forums, exclusion through caucusing, and coalition building. An argument for a neopragmatist view provides a theoretical basis for understanding counterintuitive dimensions of engagement revealed by the study.     

Zoning and the Tasmanian commercial rock lobster fishery

In this paper, the island of Tasmania is considered as a government jurisdiction. Management at this scale can conflict with sustainability in local environments. The case used to make this argument is the Tasmanian commercial rock lobster fishery. Within this fishery, Tasmania-wide management paradoxically intensifies differences at the same time as it effaces them. These differences contrast with Tasmania-wide management claims regarding sustainability. Actor–network theory is used to help approach these tensions. Zoning the fishery is put forward as a way to take into account differences to produce sustainable local outcomes.     

Zoning and the Tasmanian commercial rock lobster fishery

In this paper, the island of Tasmania is considered as a government jurisdiction. Management at this scale can conflict with sustainability in local environments. The case used to make this argument is the Tasmanian commercial rock lobster fishery. Within this fishery, Tasmania-wide management paradoxically intensifies differences at the same time as it effaces them. These differences contrast with Tasmania-wide management claims regarding sustainability. Actor-network theory is used to help approach these tensions. Zoning the fishery is put forward as a way to take into account differences to produce sustainable local outcomes.     

Scarcity and conflict,key problems in water management: a Mexican case study

Water scarcity has become a key issue in water management. There are two contrasting positions regarding scarcity as a source of conflict or cooperation. Accordingly, it is worth exploring what exactly are the conditions that make water scarcity a source of conflict or cooperation. The history of water conflicts has shown that people are more likely to kill around a water hole than when conflicts grow into national or international issues. This suggests that there may be an inverse relationship between the level of violence and the scale at which the water conflict takes place. A common problem in environmental management has been the lack of effective mechanisms to handle conflict. In the majority of these cases, the main shortcoming was an inability of the parties to identify their differences. Therefore, this research explores the idea that understanding the causes of conflict from the outset, followed by an evaluation, at the local scale, of the conditions, is a necessary precondition to finding appropriate and sustainable solutions. With this background in mind, the objective of this paper is to employ a conflict assessment process in order to explore to the extent to which a collaborative dialogue among stakeholders can be an appropriate approach to conflict resolution. A case study in Mexico is employed as a testing ground.     

Food Sovereignty and Gender Justice

Food sovereignty asserts the right of peoples to define and organize their own agricultural and food systems so as to meet local needs and so as to secure access to land, water and seed. A commitment to gender equity has been embedded in the food sovereignty concept from its earliest articulations. Some might wonder why gender justice should figure so prominently in a food movement. In this paper I review and augment the arguments for making gender equity a central component of food sovereignty. The most common argument is: if women constitute the majority of the world’s food producers, then agricultural policy is a women’s issue. And insofar as patriarchal social relations continue to dominate the globe, then changing agricultural policies will require explicit attention to gender injustice. I suggest that this is a good argument, but that an ecological feminist perspective can provide additional theoretical reasons for maintaining the centrality of gender justice in food sovereignty discourse. Moreover, ecological feminism can provide a robust theoretical framework that coheres a concept and movement with a wide set of concerns. My critique positions food sovereignty’s call to social justice as embedded in a truly radical re-thinking of dominant conceptual frameworks, and re-envisioning of political and ethical relations.     

Management knowledge through wildlife research: A perspective

Wildlife management is a large, complex, decisionoriented science. Information from research is needed to improve the decisions made by managers. The scope of the research needed to inform typical decisions far exceeds even the most optimistic assumptions about the available funds, time, or human resources. An argument is made that while changes within the current management structures are unlikely, continuing classical experimental research alone will not meet the timely needs of the field or of citizens dependent on wildlife resources. Continuing in such a no-win game seems to be a misallocation of time and funds. Significant changes are called for and suggestions for such changes are made: discussions with people in other broadly defined fields with a similar problem, new sampling strategies, increased use of computer models, use of geobased information systems, use of game theory, nonspecies research grouping, new funding structures, and sharing of facilities and of teams of specialists.     

Exploiting Abstract Possibilities: A Critique of the Concept and Practice of Product Patenting

Developments in biotechnology and genomics have moved the issue of patenting scientific and technological inventions toward the center of interest. In particular, the patentability of genes of plants, animals, or humans and of genetically modified (parts of) living organisms has been discussed, and questioned, from various normative perspectives. This paper aims to contribute to this debate. For this purpose, it first explains a number of relevant aspects of the theory and practice of patenting. The focus is on a special and increasingly significant type of patents, namely product patents. The paper provides three general arguments against the concept and practice of product patenting. The first argument briefly considers the claim that patents are legitimate because they promote socially useful innovation. Against this claim, it is argued that product patents may hamper rather than promote such innovation. The second and main argument concludes that product patents are not adequately based on actual technological inventions, as they should be according to the usual criteria of patentability. The principal moral issue is that product patents tend to reward patentees for inventions they have not really made available. The final argument proposes a method for patenting the heat of the sun. Assuming that granting this patent will be generally considered absurd, the argument exposes a further, fundamental problem of the concept and practice of product patenting.     

The Argument from Existence,Blood-Sports,and ‘Sport-Slaves’

The argument from existence is often used as an attempted justification for our use of animals in commercial practices, and is often put forward by lay-persons and philosophers alike. This paper provides an analysis of the argument from existence primarily within the context of blood-sports (applying the argument to the example of game-birding), and in doing so addresses interesting and related issues concerning the distinction between having a life and living, or worthwhile life and mere existence, as well as issues surrounding our responsibilities to prospective and actual beings. However, my analysis of the argument will go beyond the animal ethics context; it is important that it does so in order to reveal the troublesome implications of the argument and to highlight the sorts of unethical practices it supports. In particular, in applying the argument to a relevant example concerning human beings, I will discuss how the argument from existence could be used to justify the ownership of slaves who were reared for slavery. My objective is to show just how problematic the argument from existence is, with the aim of laying the argument to rest once and for all.     

What is Speciesism?

In spite of the considerable literature nowadays existing on the issue of the moral exclusion of nonhuman animals, there is still work to be done concerning the characterization of the conceptual framework with which this question can be appraised. This paper intends to tackle this task. It starts by defining speciesism as the unjustified disadvantageous consideration or treatment of those who are not classified as belonging to a certain species. It then clarifies some common misunderstandings concerning what this means. Next, it rejects the idea that there are different kinds of speciesism. Such an idea may result from confusion because there are (1) different ways in which speciesism can be defended; and (2) different speciesist positions, that is, different positions that assume speciesism among their premises. Depending on whether or not these views assume other criteria for moral consideration apart from speciesism, they can be combined or simple speciesist positions. But speciesism remains in all cases the same idea. Finally, the paper examines the concept of anthropocentrism, the disadvantageous treatment or consideration of those who are not members of the human species. This notion must be conceptually distinguished from speciesism and from misothery (aversion to nonhuman animals). Anthropocentrism is shown to be refuted because it either commits a petitio principia fallacy or it falls prey to two arguments: the argument from species overlap (widely but misleadingly known as “argument from marginal cases”) and the argument from relevance. This rebuttal identifies anthropocentrism as a speciesist view.     

The Moral Considerability of Invasive Transgenic Animals

The term moral considerability refers to the question of whether a being or set of beings is worthy of moral consideration. Moral considerability is most readily afforded to those beings that demonstrate the clearest relationship to rational humans, though many have also argued for and against the moral considerability of species, ecosystems, and “lesser” animals. Among these arguments there are at least two positions: “environmentalist” positions that tend to emphasize the systemic relations between species, and “liberationist” positions that tend to emphasize the attributes or welfare of a particular individual organism. Already, this classic conflict provides for some challenging theoretical clashes between environmentalists and animal liberationists. The question of moral considerability is complicated, however, by recent developments in genetic engineering. Some animals, like pigs and fish, have been genetically modified by humans to grow organs that can then be transplanted into humans. If environmental arguments for the moral consideration of species are correct, then we are released from our obligations to morally consider those animals that we have genetically modified, since they are by their nature always an “invader species.” If, instead, the welfare of the animal is of penultimate importance, then there is a case for strengthening the moral considerability of GM animals over “naturally-occurring” animals, since they bear a closer relationship to humans. This would appear to be an intractable problem, a “bad marriage,” as Mark Sagoff once proposed. This paper argues that the case of invasive transgenic animals exposes weaknesses in this classic conflict, and particularly, in the framing of this conflict. To remedy this framing problem, this paper argues for a reconceptualization of the term “moral considerability,” instead urging a strong distinction between moral considerability, moral relevance, and moral significance.     

Moral Considerability and the Argument from Relevance

The argument from relevance expresses an intuition that, although shared by many applied ethicists, has not been analyzed and systematized in the form of a clear argument thus far. This paper does this by introducing the concept of value relevance, which has been used before in economy but not in the philosophical literature. The paper explains how value relevance is different from moral relevance, and distinguishes between direct and indirect ways in which the latter can depend on the former. These clarifications allow the argument to explain in detail how we can make two claims. The first one is that being a recipient of value should be the only criterion for full moral considerability. This follows if we accept that value relevance should determine, directly or indirectly, moral relevance. The second claim is that, given what the main theories of wellbeing imply regarding what entities can be recipients of value, sentience is both a sufficient and a necessary criterion for full moral considerability. The paper argues that this conclusion stands even if we hold views that consider other values different from sentience.     

Conflict and Engagement: An Empirical Study of a Farmer-Extension Partnership in a Sustainable Agriculture Program

Stakeholder engagement is a crucial conceptof extension education. Engagement expressesdemocratic values of the land-grant mission byproviding opportunities for stakeholders to influenceprogram planning, including setting the agenda andnegotiating resource allocations. In practice, theconcept of engagement guides the formation ofpartnerships among extension, communities, industry,and government. In the area of sustainableagriculture, however, stakeholders may conflict,presenting challenges to the engagement process.Results from a study of a Canadian sustainableagriculture program, produced using culturalanthropology and participatory action research, detailchallenges of the engagement process that led toreconstruction of a farmer-extension partnership.Notable in the early phase of the reconstructionprocess were critical reflection, stakeholder forums,exclusion through caucusing, and coalition building.An argument for a neo-pragmatist view provides atheoretical basis for understanding counterintuitivedimensions of engagement revealed by the study.     

Use of decision analysis interviews to support the sustainable use of the forests in Finnish Upper Lapland

Controversy between alternative uses of forests in Finnish Upper Lapland has been going on for decades, and in recent years it has been escalated to a serious conflict. The core of the conflict is the adverse impacts of forestry on old forests which are important grazing areas for reindeer and which are regarded as intact nature and wilderness areas. This paper describes the experiences of applying multi-criteria decision analysis interview approach on this conflict. The approach provides tools for structuring the problem and preferences of the stakeholders as well as for analyzing the effects of different alternatives in a common framework. We focus on the practical experiences gained from the application of this approach in this context. Multi-criteria decision analysis was found to be a useful approach to evaluate the economic, ecological and cultural aspects of this intense conflict. The obtained experiences also support the view that the approach works best when tightly integrated into the planning process.     

New view of environmental health: Toward an environmental research policy for international strategies

We are witnessing a growing concern with the global dimension of many environmental issues, reflected in the increase in the number and significance of international environmental organizations. Yet there is no internationally applicable strategy for environmental research which is management oriented. A new type of research policy, which integrates ideas derived from environmental and human ecology, is required in order to deal with cultural and ecological diversity and their interactions as reflected in the ecology of landscapes. The newly defined concept of environmental health is proposed to fill this gap. This concept integrates the latest developments in landscape evolutionary ecology and environmental health, bringing out a conflict between making the environment conducive to human health and increasing the available options for supporting the essential biological and ecological processes of the environment. Lessons derived from the evolution of human environments are used in order to illustrate how health may become un umbrella for developing an environmental research policy, which could also serve as a catalyst for international environmental projects.     

International rivers and national security: The Euphrates,Ganges–Brahmaputra,Indus, Tigris,and Yarmouk rivers1

To understand a state's incentives to invest in conflict or cooperation over their international rivers, this paper argues that it is necessary to appreciate the relationships a river can create and the national security threat riparians may confront. Rivers impose interdependent and vulnerable relationships, which can compromise a state's ability to respond effectively to floods and droughts, meet its domestic food and energy needs, dredge the river, maintain its drainage systems, and allocate its domestic water budget. The inability to accomplish these tasks can contribute to social, economic, and political losses that may threaten a state's territorial integrity. Regardless of whether a state is upstream or downstream, from these relationships it acquires leverage to manipulate the interdependence and vulnerability to inflict losses on its riparian neighbour. This argument challenges several assumptions within the existing literature, including the belief that a shortage of freshwater is the initial force producing a national security threat and that an upstream–downstream river bequeaths all advantages on the upstream state and leaves the downstream state purely dependent. As the paper shows, riparians confront a more complex relationship than captured by the existing literature.     

Climate Change and National Self-Interest

Mitigation of climate change is often described as a tragedy of the commons. According to this theoretical framework, it is collectively rational for present-generation countries to mitigate climate change, but not individually rational to do so. It is rather in national self-interest to ‘free-ride’ on the mitigation actions of other countries. In this paper, I discuss two arguments criticizing this view. According to these arguments, it is in most cases individually rational for present-generation countries to mitigate, i.e., it is in their national self-interest. The first argument focuses on national self-interest in terms of economic efficiency, the second on national self-interest in terms of national security. I conclude that the critical arguments to a large extent are tenable, but that they seem to underestimate the significance of those cases in which it is not in national self-interest to mitigate climate change. In these cases the tragedy of the commons framework is still applicable.     

Between environmental and ecological democracy: theory and practice at the democracy-environment nexus

ABSTRACT

Concepts of ecological and environmental democracy seek to reconcile two normative ideals: ensuring environmental sustainability while safeguarding democracy. These ideals are frequently conceived as being in conflict, as democracy is perceived as too slow and cumbersome to deliver the urgent large-scale collective action needed to tackle environmental problems. Theories addressing the democracy-environment nexus can be situated on a spectrum from theories of ecological democracy that are more critical of existing liberal democratic institutions to theories of environmental democracy that call for reforming rather than radically transforming or dismantling those institutions. This article reviews theoretical and empirical scholarship on the democracy-environment nexus. We find continued theoretical and empirical diversity in the field, as well as vibrant debates on democratising global environmental politics, local material practices, and non-human representation. We argue for stronger dialogue between environmental political theory and empirical, policy-oriented research on democracy and sustainability, as well as further exploration of complementarities between ecological and environmental democracy. We identify four main areas of challenge and opportunity for theory and practice: public participation and populism; technocracy and expertise; governance across scales; and ecological rights and limits.     

Towards socially just adaptive climate governance: the transformative potential of conflict

Conflict is an important factor in ongoing climate change debates and its role in management is under increasing scrutiny. In this paper, I present the results of an advanced discourse analysis that analyses trends in the relationship between conflict and climate change. I present two primary discourses dominate discussion: (i) climate as a security risk and (ii) climate as one of many factors affecting power relations that may lead to conflict. Both narratives implicitly or explicitly discuss climate conflict as a cause–outcome relationship, and further primarily construct conflict and climate change within normative frames. Yet, conflict has transformative potential and can be incorporated into management in ways that harness its capacity to drive innovation and lead to more robust and just adaptive governance. I argue for a shift in the discursive frame from a cause– outcome-oriented approach to a process-driven approach, one that treats conflict as an integral part of adaptive governance processes, thus being more just and equitable. Such a shift in focus can lead to positive on ground climate adaptation outcomes, in ways that respect rather than are counter-intuitive to dominant political and societal imbalances and institutional structures.     

A “patchwork” for peace: institutions and activities in Kenya’s northern drylands

Despite the plethora of peacebuilding and conflict management institutions operating in Kenya, peace is often elusive in the northern drylands. With a lack of strong conflict management and peacebuilding processes in place from government, despite an active framework for such processes, non-state actors have filled this conflict management space. In this article, we draw on the institutional bricolage and sustainable peace literatures to understand peacebuilding through the frame of legitimacy. Using Laikipia County, Kenya as a case study, we draw on empirical findings which show that different institutions are attributed legitimacy differently. We find that while the Laikipia Professional Peace Caravan was seen as legitimate to pastoralists in conflict areas, its legitimacy was challenged by other practitioners. Similarly, while pastoralists viewed homeguards as legitimate, practitioners did not. The analysis links to discussions of the “business of peace” within the literature to consider why long-term peace has been elusive in Kenya’s northern drylands.