Stefan Bengtsson's commentary about policy hegemony discusses the alternative discourses of socialism, nationalism, and globalism. However, Stefan does not adequately demonstrate how these discourses can overcome the Dominant Western Worldview (DWW), which is imbued with anthropocentrism. It will be argued here that most policy choices promoting sustainability, and education for it, are made within a predetermined system in which the already limiting notion of environmental protection is highly contingent on human welfare. What would really contest the dominant assumptions of Vietnamese policy and, more specifically, education for sustainable development (ESD) is an alternative discourse that challenges the DWW. That alternative discourse embraces philosophical ecocentrism and practices of ecological justice between all species, and deep ecology theory - all perspectives fundamentally committed to environmental protection. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2015.1048502 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
This chapter addresses environmental education as an important subject of anthropological inquiry and demonstrates how ethnographic research can contribute to our understanding of environmental learning both in formal and informal settings. Anthropology of environmental education is rich in ethnographies of indigenous knowledge of plants and animals, as well as emotional and religious engagement with nature passed on through generations. Aside from these ethnographies of informal environmental education, anthropological studies can offer a critical reflection on the formal practice of education, especially as it is linked to development in non-Western countries. Ethnographic and critical studies of environmental education will be discussed as one of the most challenging directions of environmental anthropology of the future. 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/
Theoretical trends and schools of thought in the field of anthropology evolve rapidly. Anthropological literature must keep abreast, not only of these intellectual shifts, but also of pressing global, political, and social issues. Thus, this volume, like others before it, seeks to provide updates on the state of the science and the theoretical and methodological trends of the day. Yet, there is another, more important reason why such a volume is necessary now, ‘today’, of all days, and another reason why this will serve as more than just another update on the discipline. Today, we face some of the greatest environmental challenges in global history. Understanding the damage being done by communities, large and small, and the varied ethics and efforts contributing to its repair is of vital importance. For these reasons, environmental anthropology today is different and arguably more critical than ever before. This volume thus poses the question and raises the challenge: What can increasing the emphasis on the environment in environmental anthropology, along with the science of its problems and the theoretical and methodological tools of anthropological practice do to aid conservation efforts, policy initiatives, and our overall understanding of how to survive, culturally and physically, as citizens of the planet? This is an Accepted Manuscript of a book chapter published by Routledge/CRC Press in "Environmental Anthropology Today" on 8/5/11 available online: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203806906 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
The Dutch main water systems face pressing environmental, economic and societal challenges due to climatic changes and increased human pressure. There is a growing awareness that nature-based solutions (NBS) provide cost-effective solutions that simultaneously provide environmental, social and economic benefits and help building resilience. In spite of being carefully designed and tested, many projects tend to fail along the way or never get implemented in the first place, wasting resources and undermining trust and confidence of practitioners in NBS. Why do so many projects lose momentum even after a proof of concept is delivered? Usually, failure can be attributed to a combination of eroding political will, societal opposition and economic uncertainties. While ecological and geological processes are often well understood, there is almost no understanding around societal and economic processes related to NBS. Therefore, there is an urgent need to carefully evaluate the societal, economic, and ecological impacts and to identify design principles fostering societal support and economic viability of NBS. We address these critical knowledge gaps in this research proposal, using the largest river restoration project of the Netherlands, the Border Meuse (Grensmaas), as a Living Lab. With a transdisciplinary consortium, stakeholders have a key role a recipient and provider of information, where the broader public is involved through citizen science. Our research is scientifically innovative by using mixed methods, combining novel qualitative methods (e.g. continuous participatory narrative inquiry) and quantitative methods (e.g. economic choice experiments to elicit tradeoffs and risk preferences, agent-based modeling). The ultimate aim is to create an integral learning environment (workbench) as a decision support tool for NBS. The workbench gathers data, prepares and verifies data sets, to help stakeholders (companies, government agencies, NGOs) to quantify impacts and visualize tradeoffs of decisions regarding NBS.
