Conservation and development are now inextricably linked as is evident from the language employed in the Convention on Biological Diversity, but this has not always been the case. Furthermore, accomplishing these dual goals continues to be a difficult and contentious task. This course will provide students with a broad understanding of the history of conservation and its interrelationship with international development processes. In the most basic sense, the course will trace how both theory and praxis of conservation has evolved over the past few centuries; from exclusionary methods focused on preservation to contemporary thoughts regarding the inclusion of communities and economic development as integral to the process. This course will enable students to be versed in both why and how conservation has become integral to development and vice-versa.
The seemingly oppositional nature of these two mandates, conservation and development, will be examined thoroughly via both theory on and case-studies of conservation initiatives conducted throughout the global South, but with an emphasis on Latin America. The latter part of the course will focus on the political, economic and logistical problems of contemporary conservation. The course will investigate recent attempts to devolve conservation management to communities, as well as critiques of this method. The role that environmental non-government organizations (ENGOs) working at the local, national, and international levels play in influencing both the rhetoric and managerial aspects of conservation projects in areas with weak, under-funded or non-existent State mechanisms of control will also be analyzed. Lastly, the course will investigate impacts of the emerging trend towards private property-based conservation, and its relationship to economic and community development. Course fieldtrips and practical exercises will provide students with hands-on and face-to-face experience with conservation and development programs as a lived experience. In other words, how conservation is both part of nature and part of socio-cultural realities.
In sum, this course will provide students with a multivalent, experiential and comprehensive understanding that will serve to both complicate and explicate the relationship between the competing global needs of biodiversity conservation and socio-economic development.
Forty five teaching hours during the second semester at UPEACE.
David M. Hoffman. firstname.lastname@example.org Phone: 205 90 93
7.Course meeting times and place
UPEACE campus. Room 6. 9 AM—Noon,
From September 18th through October 6th, 2006.
Plus the week-end of September 30th-31st.
David will be available for office hours with the students every weekday from 1 to 2 pm in his office (Please sign-up on the sheet posted on his office door)
Students of the NRSD Dual Program.
8.2.Minimum and maximum number of students envisaged
The maximum of students is 25.
8.3.Prerequisite knowledge, skills, or sensitivities
8.4.Type of issues addressed
History of conservation, Wilderness
Relationship of conservation and development
Biosphere Reserves, Community-based management, Comanagement, and Integrated Conservation and Development
Conservation funding, International conservation structure
NGOs, the State, and Social Movements
Conservation as a Commons
8.5.Relations to larger issues of peace and conflict
Over the past several decades, conservation has surged to the forefront as a critical component of local, national, and international strategies as a tool to manage crises in several areas: local/rural livelihoods, national and international sustainable development, maintenance of local and global biodiversity, global climate change, and the loss of areas that provide both human recreation and habitat for wild animals. Targets set by the Convention on Biological Diversity, first signed at the 1992 Rio UN Conference on Environment and Development and later reaffirmed and augmented, call for a minimum of 12% of the Earth’s land and seas to be set aside as conservation areas. In reaction, we have seen a dramatic expansion of parks and protected areas over the last 14 years. The combination of continued population growth and economic needs with the expansion in numbers and size of protected areas is leading to more frequent and difficult conflicts. In the most basic sense, international and national conservationists are often pitted against local communities and indigenous groups in disagreements that touch upon notions of individual versus collective human rights as well as local versus national and global needs.
Because many of the areas targeted for the continued expansion of conservation are currently occupied, or used, by traditionally marginalized groups and located within marginalized countries, there are considerable differences in opinion whether conservation and social justice can be achieved. This course will provide students with a solid theoretical foundation regarding not only the past history (and ills) of conservation, but also what steps—in terms of theory and policy—have been taken to alleviate and mediate ideological and resource conflicts based in conservation. In the end, this class will help complicate the simplistic dialectic of conservation versus local development by unearthing the underlying similarities between the goals and objectives of both sides. At the same time, the course will foster a more sophisticated and nuanced understandings of how the history and implementation of conservation has actually driven the wedge between them. Ultimately, this course will facilitate student learning about the complimentary nature of conservation and development, and provide them with the knowledge to work towards bringing the two together and solving conflicts rather than exacerbating them.
8.6.Where the course fits in within the general programme of study
Conservation is a critical component of the “sustainable development” of natural resources, yet few practitioners within the field have comprehensive knowledge of both the past history and current forms of conservation practice. This course will impart knowledge that enables students to engage with and understand the complex relationship between conservation and development. In addition to giving them an adequate theoretical background to understand how protected areas have evolved over the last few centuries, it will also give them insight and direct experience with contemporary forms of conservation in Costa Rica. The combination of these two aspects will give students a thorough, working knowledge of conservation and its role in sustainability.
8.7.Degree to which this course is oriented toward academic vis-à-vis professional education
This course is part of a professional master’s program. While the course itself will be more theoretical than skills-based, the knowledge gained from this course will be directly applicable to students’ professional praxis. The course will include practical exercises and field trips to augment and compliment theoretical learning
9.Course purpose, goals, and objectives
The course will present students with history and analysis of approaches and methodologies that have been used to incorporate and integrate conservation into development. In concrete terms, it is expected that the students, after completing the course, will:
Have a professional and pragmatic understanding of conservation history, and its relation to international development.
Understand and analyze the social, political, economic, and ecological complexity of conservation interventions.
Be able to critically analyze conservation initiatives, case-studies.
Have familiarity and be able to utilize the relevant bibliographic resources in the field.
By the end of this course students will be able to answer questions such as the following: What are the moral, philosophical, political and economic roots of conservation? How has conservation theory and practice developed over time to include notions of socio-economic development? Can conservation and development co-exist? What options exist to counter the hegemony of state-driven conservation and development decisions? When and how do community-based and comanagement approaches succeed in advancing both conservation and development goals, and when do they fail? How do the mandates of international ENGOs mesh with either national or community conservation and development goals? Are conservation and development programs remnants of colonialism?
10.Teaching method/Class format
The teaching method of this course will rely upon the active participation of all students. Case studies, simulations, and discussions will be employed to create space for development of both knowledge and experience within the course topics. Presentations of course material and outside research will enhance students’ ability to create and defend arguments, as well as critically analyze both case studies and theory. Finally, the course field trip will enable students to face the reality versus the rhetoric of various forms of conservation, as well as the complexity of conservation praxis.
Adams, William M. (2002). “Nature and the Colonial Mind” in Decolonizing Nature:
Strategies for Conservation in a Post-colonial Era. London: Earthscan Publications.
Adams, William M. et al. (2004) “Biodiversity Conservation and the Eradication of
Poverty” Science Vol. 36: 1146-1149
Agrawal, Arun (2005). “Environmentality: Community, Intimate Government, and the
Making of Environmental Subjects in Kumaon, India.” Current Anthropology, 46(2), pp. 161-190.
Agrawal, Arun and Clark C. Gibson (1999). “Enchantment and Disenchantment: The
Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation” World Development
Alcorn, Janis B. (2005). “Dances around the Fire: Conservation Organizations and
Community-Based Natural Resource Management. in Communities and Conservation: Histories and Politics of Community-Based Natural Resource Management, J. Peter Brosius, Anna Lowenhaupt Tsing, and Charles Zerner Eds. AltaMira Press, Pp.37-68.
Armitage, Derek R. (2003). “Traditional agroecological knowledge, adaptive
management and the socio-politics of conservation in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia
Berkes, Fikret (2006) “The Problematique of Community-Based Conservation in a
Multi-Level World” Paper presented at International Association for the Study of Common Property Global Conference, June 19-23, 2006, Bali, Indonesia. Pp. 1-15.
Borgerhoff Mulder, Monique and Peter Coppolillo (2005). “The Evolution of Policy” in
Conservation: Linking Ecology, Economics and Culture. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. pp. 27-52.
Brockington, Dan (2004). “Community Conservation, Inequality and Injustice: Myths of Power
in Protected Area Management” Conservation & Society 2(2): 411-432.
Brosius, J. Peter (2004). “What Counts as Local Knowledge in Global Environmental
Assessments and Conventions.” Address to Plenary Session on “Integrating Local and Indigenous Perspectives into Assessments and Conventions,” at conference Bridging Scales and Epistemologies:Linking Local Knowledge and Global Science in Multi-Scale Assessments. Biblioteca Alexandrina, Alexandria, Egypt, March 17-20, 2004, pp. 1-23.
Center for Conservation Finance (2001). “Building Conservation Capital for the Future”
World Wildlife Fund, pp. 1-31.
Chapin, Mac (2004). “A Challenge to Conservationists” WorldWatch
November/December, Pp. 16-31.
Child, Brian (2004). “Parks in Transition: Biodiversity, Development, and the Bottom Line” in
Parks in Transition: Biodiversity, Rural Development and the Bottom Line Brian Child Ed. London: Earthscan. Pp. 234-255.
Cronon, William (1995). “The Trouble with Wilderness; or, Getting Back to the Wrong
Nature” in., Uncommon Ground: Rethinking the Human Place in Nature, New York: W.W. Norton & Co., William Cronon, Ed., pp 69-90.
de la Harpe, Derek et al. (2004). “Does ‘Commercialization’ of Protected Areas Threaten
Their Conservation Goals” in Parks in Transition: Biodiversity, Rural Development and the Bottom Line, Brian Child Ed. London: Earthscan, pp. 189-216.
Dowie, Mark. (2005). “Conservation Refugees: When Protecting Nature Means Kicking People Out” Orion, November/December, pp. 16-26.
Duffy, Rosaleen (2005), ¨The politics of global environmental governance: the powers
and limitations of transfrontier conservation areas in Central America¨ Review of International Studies, 31, 307-323.
and the Political Ecology of Social Movements” Journal of Political Ecology
Fairhead, James and Melissa Leach. (2001). Practising Biodiversity in Guinea:
Nature, Nation and an International Convention. Working Paper presented at the Workshop Changing perspectives on forests: ecology, people and science/policy processes in West Africa and the Caribbean, March 26-27, 2001 at The Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, pp. 1-14.
Ferraro , Paul J. and Subhrendu K. Pattanayak (2006). “Money for Nothing? A Call for
Empirical Evaluation of Biodiversity Conservation Investments,” PLoS Biology, 4(4): 0482-0488
Flavin, Chris et al. (2005). “From Readers: A Challenge to Conservationists, Phase II.”
World Watch. January/February: 4-20
Griffiths, Thomas (2004). “Help or Hindrance? The Global Environment Facility,
Biodiversity Conservation, and Indigenous Peoples” Cultural Survival Quarterly 28(1): 28-32.
Management, Market Processes and State Agendas in Upland Southeast Asia” in Communities and Conservation: Histories and Politics of Community-Based Natural Resource Management, J. Peter Brosius, Anna Lowenhaupt Tsing, and Charles Zerner Eds. AltaMira Press, pp. 427-457.
Locke, Harvey and Philip Dearden (2005). Rethinking protected area categories and the new
Murphree, Marshall (2004). “Who and What Are Parks for in Transitional Societies?” in Parks
in Transition: Biodiversity, Rural Development and the Bottom Line, Brian Child Ed. London: Earthscan Publications. Pp.217-231.
Murphree, Marshall W. (2005).“Congruent Objectives, Competing Interests, and Strategic
Compromise: Concept and Process in the Evolution of Zimbabwe’s CAMPFIRE, 1984-1996” in Communities and Conservation: Histories and Politics of Community-Based Natural Resource Management, J. Peter Brosius, Anna Lowenhaupt Tsing, and Charles Zerner Eds. AltaMira Press, pp. 105-147.
Olson, David M. (2001). Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World: A New Map of Life on
Earth”. BioScience, 51(11): 933-938
Peluso, Nancy Lee (1993). “Coercing Conservation: The Politics of State Resource
Control”in The State and Social Power in Global Environmental Politics. Ronnie D. Lipshutz and Ken Conca Eds. New York: Columbia University Press. pp. 46-70.
Pimm, Stuart L. et al. (2001) “Can We Defy Nature’s End?” Science. Vol. 293. Pp.
Pretty, Jules and David Smith (2004). “Social Capital in Biodiversity Conservation and
Management.” Conservation Biology 18(3): 631-638.
Sanderson, Steven and Shawn Bird (1998). “The New Politics of Protected Areas” in
Parks in Peril: People, Politics and Protected Areas.” Katrina Brandon, Kent H.
Redford, and Steven E. Sanderson Eds. Washington D.C.: Island Press / The
Nature Conservancy. Pp. 441-454.
Santopietro, George D. (1998). “International Conservation Assistance in an Era of
Structural Changes” Journal of Economic Issues 32(2): 365-373.
Simpson, R. David (2004). “Conserving Biodiversity through Markets: A Better Approach”
PERC Policy Series, PS-32, pp. 1-28.
Slater, Candace. (2000). “Justice for Whom? Contemporary Images of Amazonia” in
People, Plants, and Justice: The Politics of Nature Conservation. Charles Zerner,
Ed. New York: Columbia University Press. Pp. 67-82.
Wells, Michael P. and Thomas O. McShane (2004). “Management with Local Needs and
Aspirations.” Ambio Vol. 33, No. 8: 513-519
Wilshusen, Peter et al. (2002). “Reinventing a SquareWheel: Critique of a Resurgent
‘Protection Paradigm’ in International Biodiversity Conservation.” Society and
Natural Resources, 15: 17-40.
Wilshusen, Peter. R. (2003). “Exploring the Political Contours of Conservation: A
Conceptual View of Power in Practice” in Contested Nature: Promoting
International Biodiversity Conservation With Social Justice in the Twenty-first
Century. Steven R. Brechin, Peter R. Wilshusen, Crystal L. Fortwangler and
Patrick C. West Eds. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Pp. 41-57.
Wilshusen, Peter S. and Raul E. Murguia (2003). “Scaling Up from the Grassroots: NGO
Networks and the Challenges of Organizational Maintenance in Mexico’s Yucatan Peninsula.” In Contested Nature: Promoting International Biodiversity Conservation With Social Justice in the Twenty-first Century. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, pp. 195-215
Young, Emily. (1999). “Local People and Conservation in Mexico’s El Vizcaíno
Biosphere Reserve” The Geographical Review, 89(3): 364-390.
11.2.Supplemental or recommended readings
Balint, Peter J. and Judith Mashinya (2006). “The decline of a model community-based
conservation project: Governance, capacity, and devolution in Mahenye, Zimbabwe.” Geoforum 37: 805–815.
Balmford, Andrew et al. (2005) Convention on Biological Diversity’s 2010 Target
Science Vol. 307: 212-213.
Beltrán, J. (Ed.) (2000). Indigenous and Traditional Peoples and Protected Areas: Principles, Guidelines and Case Studies. IUCN, Gland, Switzerlandand Cambridge, UK and WWF
International, Gland, Switzerland. xi +133pp.
Brandon, Katrina and Michael Wells (1992). “Planning for People and Parks: Design
Dilemmas,” World Development, 20(4): 557-570.
Brosius, J. Peter, Tsing, Anna Lowenhaupt(1998). “Representing Communities: Histories and
Politics of Community-Based Natural Resource Management” Society and Natural Resources,11(2): 157-168
Emerton, L., Bishop, J. and Thomas, L. (2006). Sustainable Financing of Protected
Areas: A global review of challenges and options. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. x + 97pp.
about indigenous knowledge?” Resource Management in Asia-Pacific Working Paper No. 27: Resource Management in Asia-Pacific Project, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University Paper presented in the Resource Management in Asia-Pacific Project Seminar Series The Australian National University, 3 February 2000, pp. 1-31.
Folke, Carl et al. (2002). Resilience and Sustainable Development: Building Adaptive
Capacity in a World of Transformations Scientific Background Paper on Resilience for the process of The World Summit on Sustainable Development on behalf of The Environmental Advisory Council to the Swedish Government
Igoe, Jim (2004). “National Parks and Indigenous Communities: A Global Perspective”
in Conservation and Globalization: A Study of National Parks and Indigenous
Communities from East Africa to South Dakota. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning, pp. 134-174.
Neumann, Roderick P. (2000). “Land, Justice, and the Politics of Conservation in
Tanzania” in People, Plants, and Justice: The Politics of Nature Conservation. Charles Zerner, Ed. New York: Columbia University Press.
Primack, Richard B. (2004) “Conservation and Sustainable Development” in A Primer of
Conservation Biology, Third Edition. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates pp. 237-271.
Sanderson, Steven E. (2003). “A Conservation Agenda in an Era of Poverty” Yellowstone
Science 12(1), pp. 5–12.
Scott, James (1998). “Nature and Space.” In Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes
to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. Yale University Press. Pp. 11-53.
Sirua, Hanna (2006). “Nature Above People : Rolston and ‘Fortress’ Conservation in the
South".” Ethics & the Environment 11(1): 71-96.
The Conservation Commons:
The IUCN’s World Commission on Protected Areas:
United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) World Conservation Monitoring Centre: http://www.unep-wcmc.org/protected_areas/
Poverty and Conservation Working Group:
Poverty and conservation: landscapes, people and power:
The Community-Based Natural Resource Management Network:
Parks in Peril:
World Parks Congress:
Convention on Biological Diversity:
World Bank Global Environmental Facility (GEF):
World Wildlife Fund for Nature:
The Nature Conservancy:
The Rainforest Alliance:
Asociación Para el Desarrollo Sostenible de San José Rural (Nacientes Palmichal):
12.Detailed outline of instructional sessions/units
See annex 1
14.Assignments, exercises, projects
1) Presentation of a conservation case or issue: At the beginning of the course (Friday September 22nd is the due date), each student will choose a case or issue within conservation and development that they will present to the rest of the class. These presentations will be given over the course of the last week of the class. Topics must be approved by the professor no later than Friday, September 22nd, and presentation dates will be determined Monday, September 25th.
The presentation consists of a power point presentation* of no more than 15 minutes followed by a 5 min debate/discussion. The presentations will be evaluated by both the instructor (70%) and your peers (30%). Evaluations will be based on the following:
i) Choice of a relevant case or issue that provides insight into conservation and development;
ii) Clarity, quality, depth and completeness of the information;
iii) Quality and diversity of the slides, choice of supporting material and evidences – photographs, maps, charts, tables, etc.;
iv) Adherence to time limits.
v) Oral expression, dynamism of the presentation, capacity to engage the interest of the audience and quality of answers in the following debate (each 1/5 of the score).
*An electronic copy of the respective contribution will be submitted to email@example.com before the beginning of the class and labelled [student’s name] [presentation].doc or ppt (example: david presentation.ppt). Files not received on time will be considered as not presented.
2) Final Research Paper: Students must submit a 2,500 to 3,500 word research paper to the professor by Tuesday, October 10th. This essay should be a critical analysis of the same topic that they have chosen to present to the class for their presentations. It is expected that these essays will include references from the relevant literature outside of the readings (both required and recommended) for the course. Failure to include references from legitimate sources outside of recommended readings will reduce the final grade received on the paper by ½ letter grade. In addition, reliance upon sources from the World Wide Web and ‘grey literature’ alone is highly discouraged, and papers using articles from reputable academic journals will receive higher marks.
Students are required to engage in a dialogue with the professor about the approach and structure of their term paper. A basic outline of the term paper along with an annotated bibliography of 5-10 references from relevant sources must be turned into (via e-mail or hard copy) and the professor no later than 5 PM Wednesday, September 27th. Timely presentation of this outline and annotated bibliography will make up 10% of the final paper grade. Failure to provide the annotated bibliography on time will result in a 1% reduction per day late. The professor will react (within one week) to this bibliography either through email or in person, depending on the student preference.
The eventual term paper will be evaluated based on the following criteria (each valued at ¼ of the final score on the paper):
i) Quality and originality of the critique and treatment of the information;
ii) Use of relevant, recent and peered-reviewed references from reputable academic journals; web material; newspaper reports; and “grey literature.” Again, it is a requirement that these papers include references that are different from the required / suggested readings in this syllabus, and failure to do so will lead to a reduction of the final paper grade by ½ letter grade.
iii) Clarity and coherence of the thesis, evidence, and conclusions.
iv) Clear style, clarity; grammar and spelling.
The corresponding WORD file between 2500 and 3500 words (including title pages, references and annexes, using the WORD COUNT function) must be submitted at firstname.lastname@example.org the latest by October 10th, 2006 by 7 PM. Files should be labelled [student’s name] [term].doc (example: david term.doc). Papers that are shorter than the specified length will be considered as not presented (a zero for the assignment), and papers exceeding the limit will be penalized 10 points per 500 words extra. Late papers will be penalized 5 points for every day beyond the deadline. If the paper is not received on or before October 17th, 2006 it will be considered as not presented.
3) Field trip journal/report. As with any field experience, it is essential that students / investigators maintain notes and reflections on experiences in the field. Thus, this assignment is designed to encourage both daily reflections during the field trip and analysis of the experience upon return. Students are required to carry small notebooks to the field in order to take notes on events as they are passing, and (more importantly) to reflect on their activities, questions, concerns, and encounters during the evening.
Ultimately, students will be required to submit a reflexive paper/journal that engages with the topics, events, and learning that resulted from the field trip. The paper should be between 1000 and 1500 words and should include reflections on the following:
i) What personal realizations about the nature of conservation, both in Costa Rica and the larger world were created by the trip or by individual events?
ii) Are the sites visited examples of both Conservation and Development, or was one given preference over the other?
iii) What differences in attitude, resources, or livelihood opportunities were observed between the various sites visited?
Papers will be evaluated based on the following criteria:
i) Attempts at personal reflection, analysis, and observance beyond the surface level that is obvious to any visitor.
ii) Inclusion of details recorded during the field visit (i.e. conversations, quotes, data, observances, etc.).
iii) Clear style, grammar, and spelling.
The corresponding WORD file must be submitted to must be submitted to email@example.com at the latest by October 4th, 2006 by Midnight. Files should be labelled [student’s name] [fieldjournal].doc (example: david fieldjournal.doc). Late papers will be penalized 5 points for every day beyond the deadline. If the paper is not received on or before October 10th, 2006 it will be considered as not presented.
4) Classroom Participation: Graduate seminars are oriented towards improving the skills of students to absorb, synthesize, and present materials to others. Accordingly, participants in this course are expected to participate on a daily basis in the conversations, debates, simulations, or games that occur in the classroom. In addition to the expectation that students will participate on an informal basis, two assignments are built into the course to ensure that students work on improving their abilities to communicate information to others. They are co-leadership of a discussion of one day’s readings and the daily submission of questions or concerns related to the next day’s readings.
i) Co-Leadership of Seminar: Each student must select a day in which they and another student will be in charge of providing a synthesis of the day’s readings and guiding the first half of class discussion (approximately 1 hour). There is no required format for the synthesis of the day’s readings; however, students should avoid lecturing at length to their peers. Instead, emphasis should be placed on developing the conversational or experiential aspect of the seminar rather than the synthesis. Students should feel free to be creative in the ways that they attempt to involve their peers (and the professor) in the conversation. Presenters must attempt to involve the concerns and questions of their peers (culled from the submission of e-mail questions, see below) in their leadership.
ii) Submission of Questions: On a daily basis students are required to submit original questions to the entire class and the professor for the following day’s discussion. These questions will be based on the reading assignments for the next day. The professor will prepare an e-mail list for the students, to which all students are required to submit at least one question per reading (i.e. 3 readings = 3 questions, 2 = 2). These questions should not be: a) short factual questions or b) questions that build on those already submitted by your peers (we will have time to build a dialog on questions in the classroom).
Questions must be submitted to the list by 6 PM at the latest, so that the next day’s presenters can download and include these issues in their presentations. Failure to submit questions in a timely manner will be considered as an incomplete assignment, and will lead to a 5 point reduction in the student’s participation grade. In other words, every time a student fails to submit questions on time, or does not submit questions, their participation grade will be reduced by 5 points.
Case presentation: 25%
Term paper (including outline and annotated bibliography): 25%
Field trip Journal: 20%
Class Participation: 30%
-Informal participation: 10%
-Daily questions: 10%
-Seminar leadership: 10%
16.Instructor’s biographical data
Dr. David M. Hoffman is an assistant professor in the Department of Environment, Peace and Security at UPEACE and teaches in the Dual Master’s Programme in Natural Resources and Sustainable Development. David has conducted ethnographic research in the state of Quintana Roo, Mexico and in Iceland. His dissertation research focused on the relationship of local attitudes and behaviours to the management of a marine protected area in Quintana Roo, Mexico.
Dr. Hoffman was first trained in Environmental Studies and Anthropology (B.A., 1997, St. Lawrence University), studies in Cultural Anthropology (M.A., 2000, University of Colorado), and further specialization in maritime cultures and peoples, coastal conservation, sustainable development and community-based resource management (Interdisciplinary Certificate in Development Studies, 2005; Ph.D., Cultural Anthropology, University of Colorado, 2006).
Mon 18 Sept
Introduction to the course. Discussion of program, assignments and evaluation criteria.
Expectations & Assessment
http://www.conservationcommons.org/ Primack, Richard B. (2004)
Tue 19 Sept
Discussion of the ground rules of class work
Conservation History, Fortress Conservation
Igoe (2004), pp. 69-102
Adams (2002), pp. 18-50
Borgerhoff-Mulder & Cappolillo (2005), pp. 27-52.