Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T20:03:57.549Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Questioning calls to consensus in conservation: a Q study of conservation discourses on Galápagos

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 May 2013

ROSE CAIRNS ,
SUSANNAH M. SALLU  and
SIMON GOODMAN
ROSE CAIRNS*
Affiliation:
Sustainability Research Institute, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT
SUSANNAH M. SALLU
Affiliation:
Sustainability Research Institute, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT
SIMON GOODMAN
Affiliation:
School of Biology, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT
*
*Correspondence: Dr Rose Cairns e-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Efforts to frame conservation interventions in terms of idealized outcomes that benefit both human well-being and biodiversity, and the rhetoric of consensus that often accompanies these, have been criticized. Acknowledgement of trade–offs between often incommensurable interests and perspectives, has been argued to be more democratic and transparent. This paper critically examines calls to consensus in conservation on the Galápagos Islands, where the population has been urged to unite around a shared vision of conservation in order to secure a sustainable future. Q methodology was used to examine the discourses of conservation on the islands, and to assess whether a shared vision of Galápagos is either achievable or desirable. Thirty-three participants carried out Q sorts about Galápagos conservation. Three discourses emerged from the analysis: conservation of Galápagos as an international/global concern; conservation linked with sustainable development; and social welfare and equitable development. The results highlight the subjective and political nature of the different discourses, and the paper concludes that calls to consensus or shared visions, while seductive in their promise of harmonious cooperation for conservation, can be read as attempts to depoliticize debates around conservation, and as such should be treated with caution.

Keywords

consensusdemocracydiscourse analysisGalápagosQ methodsocial perspectivestrade-offs
Type
Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 41 , Issue 1 , March 2014 , pp. 13 - 26
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, W.M. (2009) Green Development. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Barry, J. & Proops, J. (1999) Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology. Ecological Economics 28 (3): 337–345.Google Scholar
Bataille, A., Cunningham, A., Cedeño, V., Patiño, L., Constantinou, A., Kramer, L. & Goodman, S.J. (2009) Natural colonization and adaptation of a mosquito species in Galápagos and its implications for disease threats to endemic wildlife. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 106 (25): 10230–10235.Google Scholar
Bensted-Smith, R. (2002) A Biodiversity Vision for the Galápagos Islands. Puerto Ayora, Galápagos: Charles Darwin Foundation.Google Scholar
Brown, S. (1971) The forced-free distinction in Q technique. Journal of Educational Measurement 8 (4): 283–287.Google Scholar
Brown, S. (1986) Q technique and method: principles and procedures. New tools for social scientists. In: Advances and Applications in Research Methods, ed. Berry, W.D. & Lewis-Beck, M.S., pp. 57–76. Beverly Hills, CA, USA: Sage.Google Scholar
Brown, S.R. (1980) Political Subjectivity: Applications of Q Methodology in Political Science. New Haven, CT, USA: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Brown, S.R. (1993) A primer on Q methodology. Operant Subjectivity 16 (3/4): 91–138.Google Scholar
Burt, C. (1972) The reciprocity principle. In: Science, Psychology and Communication, ed. Brown, S.R. & Brenner, D.J., pp. 39–56. New York, NY, USA: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Buscher, B. (2008) Conservation, neoliberalism, and social science: a critical reflection on the SCB 2007 annual meeting in South Africa. Conservation Biology 22 (2): 229–231.Google Scholar
Buscher, B. (2010) Anti-politics as political strategy: neoliberalism and transfrontier conservation in Southern Africa. Development and Change 4 (1): 29–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Causton, C.E., Peck, S.B., Sinclair, B.J., Roque-Albelo, L., Hodgson, C.J. & Landry, B. (2006) Alien insects: threats and implications for conservation of Galápagos Islands. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 99 (1): 121–143.Google Scholar
CDF (2010) Galápagos Report 2009–2010. Puerto Ayora, Galápagos, Ecuador: CDF Google Scholar
Collingridge, D. & Reeve, C. (1986) Science Speaks to Power: the Role of Experts in Policy Making. London, UK: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
Collins, H.M. & Yearley, S. (1992) Epistemological chicken. In: Science as Practice and Culture, ed. Pickering, A., pp. 301–326. Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dayton, B.W. (2000) Policy frames, policy making and the global climate change discourse. In: Social Discourse and Environmental Policy: an Application of Q Methodology, ed. Addams, H. & Proops, J., pp. 71–99. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J.S. & Niemeyer, S. (2008) Discursive representation. American Political Science Review 102 (4): 481–493.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J.S. (1997) The Politics of the Earth. Environmental Discourses. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Epler, B. (2007) Tourism, the Economy, Population Growth and Conservation in Galápagos. Puerto Ayora, Galápagos Islands, Ecuador: Charles Darwin Foundation.Google Scholar
Faith, D.P. & Walker, P. (2002) The role of trade-offs in biodiversity conservation planning: linking local management, regional planning and global conservation efforts. Journal of Biosciences 27 (4): 393–407.Google Scholar
Ferguson, J. (1994) The Anti-politics Machine. ‘Development’, Depoliticization, and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho. Minneapolis, MN, USA: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
González, J.A., Montes, C., Rodríguez, J. & Tapia, W. (2008) Rethinking the Galápagos Islands as a complex social-ecological system: implications for conservation and management. Ecology and Society 13 (2): 13.Google Scholar
Grenier, C. (2007) Conservación Contra Natura: Las Islas Galápagos. Lima, Peru: Instituto Francés de Estudios Andinos (IEFA).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hajer, M.A. (1997) The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hennessy, E. & McCleary, A. (2011) Nature's Eden? The production and effects of ‘pristine’ nature in the Galápagos Islands. Island Studies Journal 6 (2): 131–156.Google Scholar
Hirsch, P.D., Adams, W., Brosius, J.P., Zia, A., Bariola, N. & Dammert, J.L. (2011) Acknowledging conservation trade-offs and embracing complexity. Conservation Biology 25 (2): 259–264.Google Scholar
Hoppe, R. (1999) Argumentative turn. Policy analysis, science and politics: from ‘speaking truth to power’ to ‘making sense together’. Science and Public Policy 26 (3): 201–210.Google Scholar
INEC (2010) Instituto Nacional de Estadistica y Censo. Resultados Censo de Poblacion [www document]. URL http://www.inec.gob.ec/cpv/ Google Scholar
Instituto Nacional de Galápagos (2002) Plan regional para la conservación y el desarrollo sustentable de Galápagos. San Cristobal, Galápagos, Ecuador: Instituto Nacional de Galápagos (INGALA).Google Scholar
Jasanoff, S. (2011) Cosmopolitan knowledge: climate science and global civic epistemology. In: The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society, ed. Dryzek, J.S., Norgaard, R.B. & Schlosberg, D., pp. 129–143. New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
King, B. & Peralvo, M. (2010) Coupling community heterogeneity and perceptions of conservation in rural South Africa. Human Ecology 38 (2): 265–281.Google Scholar
Kline, P. (1993) An Easy Guide to Factor Analysis. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Larson, E.J. (2001) Evolution's Workshop: God and Science on the Galápagos Islands. London, UK: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Leach, M. & Mearns, R. (1996) Environmental change and policy: challenging recieved wisdom in Africa. In: The Lie of the Land: Challenging Received Wisdom on the African Environment, ed. Leach, M. & Mearns, R., pp. 1–33. Oxford, UK: James Currey.Google Scholar
Mattson, D.J., Byrd, K.L., Rutherford, M.B., Brown, S.R. & Clark, T.W. (2006) Finding common ground in large carnivore conservation: mapping contending perspectives. Environmental Science and Policy 9 (4): 392–405.Google Scholar
McKeown, B. & Thomas, D. (1988) Q Methodology. Newbury Park, UK: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Mcshane, T., Hirsch, P., Chi, T., Songorwa, A., Kinzig, A., Monteferri, B., Mutekanga, D., Thang, H., Luis, J., Pulgar-vidal, M., Welch-Devine, M., Brosius, J.P., Coppolillo, P. & Connor, S. (2011) Hard choices: making trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and human well-being. Biological Conservation 144: 966–972.Google Scholar
Merlen, G. (2007) Conserving the Galápagos. In: Galápagos: the Islands that Changed the World, ed. Stewart, P.. London, UK: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Niemeyer, S. (2002) Deliberation in the wilderness: transforming policy preferences through discourse. PhD thesis, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.Google Scholar
Oates, J.F. (1999) Myth and Reality in the Rain Forest: How Conservation Strategies are Failing in West Africa. Berkley, CA, USA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Ockwell, D.G. (2008) Opening up'policy to reflexive appraisal: a role for Q methodology? A case study of fire management in Cape York, Australia. Policy Science 41 (4): 263–292.Google Scholar
Ospina, P. (2004) Galápagos, naturaleza y sociedad. Actores sociales y conflictos ambientales en las islas Galápagos, Ecuador. Masters thesis, Universidad Iberoamericana, Mexico City, Mexico.Google Scholar
Oviedo, P. (1999) The Galápagos Islands: conflict management in conservation and sustainable resource management. In: Cultivating Peace: Conflict and Collaboration in Natural Resource Management, ed. Buckles, D., pp. 163–182. Washington DC, USA: IDRC/ World Bank.Google Scholar
Peterson, M.N., Peterson, M.J., & Peterson, T.R (2005) Conservation and the myth of consensus. Conservation Biology 19 (3): 762–767.Google Scholar
Pielke, R.A. (2007) The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
PNG (2005) Plan de Manejo del Parque National Galápagos: Un pacto por la conservacion y el desarollo sustentable del Archipelago. Parque Nacional Galápagos, Puerto Ayora, Galápagos, Ecuador.Google Scholar
PNG (2011) Parque Nacional Galápagos visitor statistics [www document]. URL http://www.galapagospark.org/onecol.php?page=turismo_estadisticas Google Scholar
Quiroga, D. (2009) Galápagos, laboratorio natural de la evolucion: una aproximacion historica. In: Ciencia para la sostenibilidad en Galápagos: el papel de la investigacion cientifica y tecnologica en el pasado, presente y futuro del archipielago, ed. Tapia, W., Ospina, P., Quiroga, D., González, J.A. & Montes, C.. Puerto Ayora, Galápagos: Parque Nacional Galápagos.Google Scholar
Robbins, P. (2006) The politics of barstool biology: environmental knowledge and power in greater Northern Yellowstone. Geoforum 37 (2): 185–199.Google Scholar
Roe, D. (2008) The origins and evolution of the conservation-poverty debate: a review of key literature, events and policy processes. Oryx 42 (04): 491–503.Google Scholar
Sachs, W. (1999). Sustainable development and the crisis of nature: on the political anatomy of an oxymoron. In: Living with Nature. Environmental Politics as Cultural Discourse, ed. Hajer, M. & Fischer, F., pp. 23–41. New York, USA: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sarewitz, D. (2004) How science makes environmental controversies worse. Environmental Science and Policy 7 (5): 385–403.Google Scholar
Schmidt-Soltau, K. (2004) The costs of rainforest conservation: local responses towards integrated conservation and development projects in Cameroon. Journal of Contemporary African Studies 22 (1): 93–117.Google Scholar
Schmolck, P. (2002) PQMethod 2.11 [software]. Available to download from http://www.lrz-muenchen.de/~schmolck/qmethod/downpqx.htm Google Scholar
Snow, D.W. & Grimwood, I.R. (1966) Recommendations for the Administration of the Proposed Galápagos National Park and the Development of its Tourist Potential (English summary). Puerto Ayora, Galápagos, Ecuador: Charles Darwin Foundation Google Scholar
Stirling, A. (2008) ‘Opening up’ and ‘closing down’: power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science, Technology and Human Values 33 (2): 262–294.Google Scholar
Sunderland, T., Ehringhaus, C. & Campbell, B.M. (2008) Conservation and development in tropical forest landscapes: a time to face the trade-offs? Environmental Conservation 34 (4): 276–279.Google Scholar
Sunstein, C.R. (2007) Ideological amplification. Constellations 14 (2): 273–279.Google Scholar
Swedeen, P. (2006) Post-normal science in practice: a Q study of the potential for sustainable forestry in Washington State, USA. Ecological Economics 57 (2): 190–208.Google Scholar
Tapia, W., Ospina, P., Quiroga, D., Gonzalez, J.A. & Montes, C., eds (2009 a) Ciencia para la sostenibilidad en Galápagos: el papel de la investigacion cientifica y tecnologica en el pasado, presente y futuro del archipielago. Quito, Ecuador: Parque Nacional Galápagos.Google Scholar
Tapia, W., Ospina, P., Quiroga, D., Gonzalez, J.A. & Montes, C. (2009 b) Entendiendo Galápagos como un sistema socioecologico complejo: implicaciones para la investigacion cientifica en el achipielago. In: Ciencia para la sostenibilidad en Galápagos: el papel de la investigacion cientifica y tecnologica en el pasado, presente y futuro del archipielago, ed. Tapia, W., Ospina, P., Quiroga, D., González, J.A. & Montes, C., pp. 127–140. Quito, Ecuador: Parque Nacional Galápagos.Google Scholar
Tapia, W., Rodriguez, J., Reck, G., Ospina, P., Quiroga, D., Gonzalez, J.A. & Montes, C. (2009 c) Ciencia para Galápagos: una propuesta de estrategia y agenda de investigaciones prioritarias para la sustentabilidad del archipielago. In: Ciencia para la sostenibilidad en Galápagos: el papel de la investigacion cientifica y tecnologica en el pasado, presente y futuro del archipielago, ed. Tapia, W., Ospina, P., Quiroga, D., González, J.A. & Montes, C., pp. 157–178. Quito, Ecuador: Parque Nacional Galápagos.Google Scholar
Taylor, J.E., Hardner, J. & Stewart, M. (2006) Ecotourism and economic growth in the Galápagos: an island economy-wide analysis. Working paper 06–001, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California, Davis, USA.Google Scholar
Terborgh, J. (1999) Requiem for Nature. Washington, DC, USA: Island Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, M. (1999) Security and solidarity: an anti-reductionist analysis of environmental policy. In: Living with Nature, ed. Fischer, F. & Hajer, M., pp. 135–150. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Torgerson, D. (1990) Limits of the administrative mind: the problem of defining environmental problems. In: Managing Leviathan, ed. Paehlke, R. & Torgerson, D., pp. 115–161. Peterborough, Ontario, Canada: Broadview Press.Google Scholar
UNESCO (2007) Report of the reactive monitoring mission, 8–13th April, Galápagos Islands (Ecuador) [www document]. URL http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1/documents/ Google Scholar
Watkins, G. & Cruz, F. (2007) Galápagos at Risk: a Socioeconomic Analysis of the Situation in the Archipelago. Puerto Ayora, Galápgos, Ecuador: Charles Darwin Foundation.Google Scholar
Watts, S. & Stenner, P. (2005) Doing Q methodology: theory, method and interpretation. Qualitative Research in Psychology 2 (1): 67–91.Google Scholar
Webler, T., Danielson, S., Tuler, S., Kalof, L. & Shockey, I. (2009) Using Q Method to Reveal Social Perspectives in Environmental Research. Greenfield, MA, USA: Social and Environmental Research Institute.Google Scholar
West, P. (2006) Conservation is Our Government Now: the Politics of Ecology in Papua New Guinea. Durham, UK: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Wilshusen, P.R., Brechin, S.R., Fortwangler, C.L. & West, P.C. (2003). Contested nature: conservation and development at the turn of the twenty-first century. In: Contested Nature: Promoting International Biodiversity With Social Justice in the Twenty-first Century, ed. Brechin, S.R., Wilshusen, P.R., Fortwangler, C.L. & West, P.C., pp. 1–24. Albany, USA: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar