Position Paper, I-19 Initiative

Jim Proctor
Department of Geography

University of California - Santa Barbara

E-mail: jproctor@pollux.geog.ucsb.edu

My overarching research interests address geographical dimensions of systems of environmental ethics, including their spatial and scalar attributes, relationships to local and larger senses of place, and expression in representations of nature. I examine these areas in the context of anthropogenic environmental change, in particular human impacts on biological diversity, both "negative" (biodiversity loss) and "positive" (biodiversity conservation).

I am finalizing a research plan to study the ethics of biodiversity loss and conservation over the next four years. It squarely addresses the political ecology research theme of the I-19 Initiative, and ties in with the Initiative's conceptual issues in many respects, including issues 1 (by studying the incorporation of particular values in GIS-based representations of nature), 3 (by finding ways to "map place onto space" in GIS), and 4 (by identifying means for stakeholder groups to interact over ethical issues associated with biodiversity loss/conservation). I am thus quite intent on developing connections with similar research projects over the span of the Initiative.

One major focus of my future work concerns how values are embedded in representations of natural habitat as affected by humans. Geographic information systems have played a central role in analysis of habitat transformation responsible for biodiversity loss; GIS technology is also central to biodiversity conservation planning efforts. Many of these applications of GIS are built on an empiricist model of knowledge, in which representations are assumed to mirror nature. Any fuzziness in the mirror is understood to be a function of biophysical complexity, which optimally will be reduced as more data become available and the predictive power of models is increased. Another major assumption involves objectivism: that values and other "subjective" elements should not intrude into representations of nature, as good policy comes from good (i.e., objective) science.

What becomes of this scenario when the social construction of nature argument is taken seriously? Two points are important for my work. First, one must effectively level the playing field by admitting that prevailing scientific constructions of biodiversity loss and biodiversity conservation priorities cannot automatically be construed as representative of "the truth," nor certainly of any majority opinion among the diverse stakeholders participating in, and affected by, biodiversity conservation efforts. This point raises some thorny epistemological problems, however, if we wish not to collapse truth into power. My own position on this matter is that of an interpretive critical realism, which holds to the possibility that we can speak of better and worse constructions of nature, though we must seek to understand what dominant and alternative constructions exist and why.

Second, one must admit that biodiversity loss and conservation is far more than a matter of getting the facts straight. The very term biodiversity is an expression of value as well as a description of nonhuman life; any attempt to assess the significance of biodiversity loss and balance biodiversity conservation priorities against other pressing social and economic needs is irretrievably normative. This point suggests that social constructions of nature are irretrievably value-ridden; culturally-informed ethical analysis can thus play a fundamental role in understanding the ways differently-situated people make sense of anthropogenic environmental change and corrective measures designed to prevent adverse environmental impacts in the future.

My interests are both critical and constructive. At the critical level, I will be studying biodiversity conservation efforts at several scalar levels (international initiatives, national policies, and regional and local planning efforts) to determine the value assumptions in dominant representations of "positive" and "negative" environmental change. My own empirical research will focus on biodiversity conservation planning in Pacific Northwest coniferous forests; specifically, I will be working in conjunction with several Adaptive Management Areas (AMAs) that have been selected to foster active community involvement in local biodiversity planning. This work will have a constructive intent as well: to find ways to facilitate discussions of issues of ethics surrounding biodiversity loss and conservation, in particular as revealed in diverse representations of nature.

My research proposes to investigate these various representations as graphical narratives of environmental change. Biodiversity loss and conservation can be construed as a story line, with the former providing historical context, and the latter providing a future path. Most sites involved in biodiversity conservation have what could be called a "default narrative" of environmental change, usually describing major proximate causes of habitat loss, extent and significance of impacts, priority species/habitats for conservation, major land use changes necessary to protect these priority species/habitats, etc. Many of these elements are either represented in, or derive from analysis of, GIS. I am interested not only in these default narratives but the alternative narratives of other stakeholders. I intend to assemble these graphical narratives on one GIS both as a means of obtaining and re-representing stakeholder perspectives, and of providing a basis for stakeholder interaction with each other on their divergent moral understandings.

Often, people who live in sites prioritized for biodiversity conservation are differentially affected; many suffer adverse consequences. Yet their participation is crucial. The challenge in this regard as I see it is not only political; it is also a question of finding ways to "map place onto space," to provide a means to represent their local descriptive and moral understandings on a medium that is far more suited for quantifiable, georeferenced empirical data than cultural meanings. My hope is that the graphical narrative approach provides a way to make matters of value concrete.

My research objectives are explicitly collaborative; in fact, I will be seeking modest funding to partially support similar efforts in other sites targeted for biodiversity conservation. I anticipate developing a WWW-based collaborative research and educational network out of the project, to serve as a resource for academic institutions and study site communities involved in the project.

The I-19 Initiative has the potential to do fundamental work, both critical and constructive, in the realm of GIS. GIS is central in environmental planning; for better or worse, GIS-based analysis will play a major role in how people understand and shape nature in the future. It is highly important for us now to analyze how GIS-based representations constrain evaluations of nature, and to find ways to overcome its empiricist and objectivist legacy if GIS is to serve as the integrative tool it purports to be.

Return to