Newing, Helen S. (2010) Interdisciplinary training in environmental conservation: definitions, progress and future directions. Environmental Conservation, 37 (4). pp. 410-418. ISSN 0376-8929. (doi:10.1017/S0376892910000743) (The full text of this publication is not currently available from this repository. You may be able to access a copy if URLs are provided) (KAR id:28226)
The full text of this publication is not currently available from this repository. You may be able to access a copy if URLs are provided. | |
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0376892910000743 |
Abstract
The development of interdisciplinary approaches to
environmental conservation is obviously related to
interdisciplinary training in undergraduate and postgraduate
conservation-oriented degree programmes.
This paper therefore examines interdisciplinary
training in environmental conservation, with a focus on
conservation biology. The specific objectives are: (1) to
analyse debates about the nature of ‘interdisciplinarity’
in conservation biology; (2) to examine the status
of interdisciplinary training in current academic
programmes in conservation biology; and (3) to
make recommendations in terms of interdisciplinary
or other non-natural science content that should
be prioritized for inclusion in the curriculum. The
term ‘interdisciplinarity’ has been used in relation to
conservation training to refer to (1) any social science
content; (2) vocational skills training; (3) integrative
or practice-based exercises, sometimes with no
indication of disciplinary content; (4) the (variously
defined) ‘human dimensions’ of conservation, and
(5) interaction between different academic disciplines
(usually crossing the natural science–social science
divide). In terms of training, the natural sciences
have remained predominant in almost all reported
academic programmes, but there now appears to be
more coverage of non-natural science issues than
previously. However the lack of consistency in the
use of terms makes it difficult to assess progress.
Further debate about curriculum development in
conservation would be aided greatly by recognizing
the distinction between the different aspects of
non-natural science training, and treating each of
them in its own right. Most degree programmes in
environment-related disciplines specialize to varying
degrees either in the natural sciences or the social
sciences, and a comprehensive programme covering
both of these in depth is likely to be problematic.
However, some understanding of different disciplinary
?Correspondence: Dr Helen Newing Tel: + 44 1227 827034 Fax:
+ 44 1227 827289 e-mail: H.S.Newing@kent.ac.uk
perspectives is increasingly important in a career
in environmental conservation, and it is argued
that, as a minimum, a primarily natural sciencebased
undergraduate programme in environmental
conservation should include: (1) an introduction to
social science perspectives on the environment; (2)
basic training in social science methods, research
design and science theory; (3) vocational skills
training, to the extent that it can be built into
existing curricular components; and (4) integrative
problem-solving tasks that can be used in relation
to any or all of the above. A similar list could be
constructed for social science-based environmental
degree programmes, incorporating somebasic training
in natural science perspectives. Postgraduate training
programmes are more varied in what they aim to
achieve in terms of disciplinary breadth; they can
develop students’ existing specialist expertise, offer
supplementary training to allow students to increase
the disciplinary breadth of their expertise, or focus on
the issue of interdisciplinarity itself.
- Export to:
- RefWorks
- EPrints3 XML
- BibTeX
- CSV
- Depositors only (login required):