Anthropology is traditionally broken into several subfields, physical/biological anthropology, social/cultural anthropology, linguistic anthropology, archaeology, and sometimes also applied anthropology. Anthropology of the environment, or environmental anthropology, is a specialization within the field of anthropology that studies current and historic human-environment interactions. Although the terms environmental anthropology and ecological anthropology are often used interchangeably, environmental anthropology is considered by some to be the applied dimension of ecological anthropology, which encompasses the broad topics of primate ecology, paleoecology, cultural ecology, ethnoecology, historical ecology, political ecology, spiritual ecology, and human behavioral and evolutionary ecology. However, according to Townsend (2009: 104), “ecological anthropology will refer to one particular type of research in environmental anthropology—field studies that describe a single ecosystem including a human population and frequently deal with a small population of only a few hundred people such as a village or neighborhood.” Kottak states that the new ecological anthropology mirrors more general changes in the discipline: the shift from research focusing on a single community or unique culture “to recognizing pervasive linkages and concomitant flows of people, technology, images, and information, and to acknowledging the impact of differential power and status in the postmodern world on local entities. In the new ecological anthropology, everything is on a larger scale” (Kottak 1999:25). Environmental anthropology, like all other anthropological subdisciplines, addresses both the similarities and differences between human cultures; but unlike other subdisciplines (or more in line with applied anthropology), it has an end goal—it seeks to find solutions to environmental damage. While in our first volume (Shoreman-Ouimet and Kopnina 2011) we criticized Kottak’s anthropocentric bias prioritizing environmental anthropology's role as a supporter of primarily people's (and particularly indigenous) interests rather than ecological evidence. In his newer 2 publication, Kottak (2010:579) states: “Today’s ecological anthropology, aka environmental anthropology, attempts not only to understand but also to find solutions to environmental problems.” And because this is a global cause with all cultures, peoples, creeds, and nationalities at stake, the contributors to this volume demonstrate that the future of environmental anthropology may be more focused on finding the universals that underlie human differences and understanding how these universals can best be put to use to end environmental damage. This is an Accepted Manuscript of a book chapter published by Routledge/CRC Press in "Environmental Anthropology: Future Directions" on 7/18/13 available online: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203403341 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
Indigenous rights’ relationship to ecological justice in Amazonia has not been explicitly explored in the literature. As social scientists rarely talk about violence against non-humans, this case study of conservation in Amazonia will explore this new area of concern. Ethical inquiries in conservation also engage with the manifold ways through which human and nonhuman lives are entangled and emplaced within wider ecological relationships, converging in the notion of environmental justice, which often fails to account for overt violence or exploitation of non-humans. Reflecting on this omission, this chapter discusses the applicability of engaged social science and conservation to habitat destruction in Amazonia, and broader contexts involving violence against non-humans. The questions addressed in this chapter are: is the idea of ecological justice sufficiently supported in conservation debate, and more practical Amazonian contexts? Can advocacy of inherent rights be applied to the case of non-humans? Can indigenous communities still be considered 'traditional' considering population growth and increased consumptive practices? Concluding that the existing forms of justice are inadequate in dealing with the massive scale of non-human abuse, this chapter provides directions for conservation that engage with deep ecology and ecological justice in the Amazonian context. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-29153-2 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
Urban open space has a huge impact on human health, well-being and urban ecosystems. One of the open spaces where the environmental and ecological challenges of cities manifest the most is the urban riverfront, often characterised by fragmented land use, lack of accessibility, heavy riverside vehicular traffic, and extreme degradation of river hydrology and ecology. More often than not, the current spatial design of the riverfront hinders rather than supports the delivery of ecosystem services and, in consequence, its potential to improve the health and well-being of urban inhabitants is diminished. Hence, the design of riverside open spaces is crucial. Urban and landscape design in those spaces requires instruments that can aid designers, planners, decision-makers and stakeholders in devising spatial interventions that integrate complex environmental and ecological goals in high quality public space design. By recognising the multiple environmental and ecological benefits of green space and water in the city, the project “I surf” applies a set of four design instruments, namely the Connector, the Sponge, the Integrator, and the Scaler. I surf is a three-phased project that tests, validates and updates these instruments through a design-driven research methodology involving two design workshops and expert meetings addressing three different riverside urban spaces in Amsterdam: in the Ij waterfront, along River Amstel, and on a site located on the canal network. The project concludes with an updated and transferrable instrument set available for urban and landscape design applications in Amsterdam and in other Dutch cities crossed by rivers.
Social enterprises (SEs) can play an important role in addressing societal problems. SEs are businesses whose primary objective is to generate social impact (e.g. well-being, social wealth and cohesion, and ecology) through a market-based model. SEs achieve this through a hybrid business model, trading-off financial and social value creation objectives. SEs typically face higher costs, for example because of ethical sourcing principles and/or production processes centering around the needs of workers who are vulnerable or hard-to-employ. This results in SEs’ struggling to scale-up due to their relatively costly operating model. Traditional management techniques are not always appropriate, as they do not take into account the tensions between financial and social value creation objectives of SEs. Our project examines how continuous improvement, and in particular the philosophy and tools of Lean can be harnessed to improve SEs competitiveness. Lean organizations share many values with SEs, such as respect for people, suggesting a good fit between the values and principles of Lean and those of SEs. The consortium for this project is a cooperation between the research groups Improving Business and New Marketing of the Center of Expertise Well-Being Economy and New Entrepreneurship and the minor Continuous Improvement of AVANS Hogeschool, and the SME companies Elliz in Company and Ons Label. The project consists of two phases, an exploratory phase during which the question “in what ways can the philosophy and tools of Lean be used by Social Enterprises?” will be addressed. Interviews and focus groups will be conducted with multiple SEs (not only partners). Participant observation will be conducted by the students of the minor Continuous Improvement at the partner SEs. During the second phase, the implementation of the identified principles and tools will be operationalized through a roadmap. Action research will be conducted in cooperation with the partner SEs.
The Netherlands is facing great challenges to achieve (inter)national climate mitigation objectives in limited time, budget and space. Drastic innovative measures such as floating solar parks are high on political agendas and are entering our water systems . The clear advantages of floating solar (multifunctional use of space) led to a fast deployment of renewable energy sources without extensive research to adequately evaluate the impacts on our environment. Acquisition of research data with holistic monitoring methods are urgently needed in order to prevent disinvestments. In this proposal ten SMEs with different expertise and technologies are joining efforts with researchers and four public parties (and 12 indirectly involved) to answer the research question “Which monitoring technologies and intelligent data interpretation techniques are required to be able to conduct comprehensive, efficient and cost-effective monitoring of the impacts of floating solar panels in their surroundings?" The outputs after a two-year project will play a significant and indispensable role in making Green Energy Resources Greener. Specific output includes a detailed inventory of existing projects, monitoring method for collection/analysis of datasets (parameters/footage on climate, water quality, ecology) on the effects of floating solar panels on the environment using heterogeneous unmanned robots, workshops with public & private partners and stakeholders, scientific and technical papers and update of national guidelines for optimizing the relationship between solar panels and the surrounding environment. Project results have a global interest and the consortium partners aim at upscaling for the international market. This project will enrich the involved partners with their practical knowledge, and SMEs will be equipped with the new technologies to be at the forefront and benefit from the increasing floating solar market opportunities. This project will also make a significant contribution to various educational curricula in universities of applied sciences.
