Blog.Sense Ecology is een duurzaam en praktijkgerciht kunst-onderzoeksproject. Het project onderzoekt alternatieve manieren om het landschap te ervaren, en onderzoekt en ontwikkelt nieuwe methoden en hulpmiddelen voor biodiversiteitsonderzoek. Sense Ecology ontwerpt en ondersteund projecten die zich richten op zintuigelijke waarneming van de natuurlijke omgeving.
LINK
Biodiversity preservation is often viewed in utilitarian terms that render non-human species as ecosystem services or natural resources. The economic capture approach may be inadequate in addressing biodiversity loss because extinction of some species could conceivably come to pass without jeopardizing the survival of the humans. People might be materially sustained by a technological biora made to yield services and products required for human life. The failure to address biodiversity loss calls for an exploration of alternative paradigms. It is proposed that the failure to address biodiversity loss stems from the fact that ecocentric value holders are politically marginalized and underrepresented in the most powerful strata of society. While anthropocentric concerns with environment and private expressions of biophilia are acceptable in the wider society, the more pronounced publicly expressed deep ecology position is discouraged. “Radical environmentalists” are among the least understood of all contemporary opposition movements, not only in tactical terms, but also ethically. The article argues in favor of the inclusion of deep ecology perspective as an alternative to the current anthropocentric paradigm. https://doi.org/10.1080/1943815X.2012.742914 https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
DOCUMENT
Sense Ecology is een duurzaam en praktijkgericht kunst-onderzoeksproject . Het project ontwikkelt alternatieve manieren om het landschap en de 'other- than-human-world' te ervaren.Het onderzoekt nieuwe methoden en hulpmiddelen voor biodiversiteitsonderzoek, en vernieuwende toepassingen voor sensortechnologie endataverwerking.
DOCUMENT
Camera trap technology has galvanized the study of predator-prey ecology in wild animal communities by expanding the scale and diversity of predator-prey interactions that can be analyzed. While observational data from systematic camera arrays have informed inferences on the spatiotemporal outcomes of predator-prey interactions, the capacity for observational studies to identify mechanistic drivers of species interactions is limited. Experimental study designs that utilize camera traps uniquely allow for testing hypothesized mechanisms that drive predator and prey behavior, incorporating environmental realism not possible in the lab while benefiting from the distinct capacity of camera traps to generate large data sets from multiple species with minimal observer interference. However, such pairings of camera traps with experimental methods remain underutilized. We review recent advances in the experimental application of camera traps to investigate fundamental mechanisms underlying predator-prey ecology and present a conceptual guide for designing experimental camera trap studies. Only 9% of camera trap studies on predator-prey ecology in our review mention experimental methods, but the application of experimental approaches is increasing. To illustrate the utility of camera trap-based experiments using a case study, we propose a study design that integrates observational and experimental techniques to test a perennial question in predator-prey ecology: how prey balance foraging and safety, as formalized by the risk allocation hypothesis. We discuss applications of camera trap-based experiments to evaluate the diversity of anthropogenic influences on wildlife communities globally. Finally, we review challenges to conducting experimental camera trap studies. Experimental camera trap studies have already begun to play an important role in understanding the predator-prey ecology of free-living animals, and such methods will become increasingly critical to quantifying drivers of community interactions in a rapidly changing world. We recommend increased application of experimental methods in the study of predator and prey responses to humans, synanthropic and invasive species, and other anthropogenic disturbances.
DOCUMENT
This article focuses on the role of ethical perspectives such as deep ecology and animal rights in relation to environmental education, arguing that such perspectives are well-placed to reposition students as responsible planetary citizens. We focus on the linkage between non-consequentialism, animal rights, and deep ecology in an educational context and discuss the broader issue of ethics in education. Finally, we discuss how the inclusion of deep ecology and animal rights perspectives would improve current environmental education programs by deepening the respect for nonhumans and their inclusion in the ethical community. https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
DOCUMENT
This introductory article argues why it is both relevant and timely to reflect on ways in which art and ecology can be brought together in educational practices – the theme of this edition of Artizein. It also provides an overview of all written contributions.
MULTIFILE
Thinking about care in the organization of an ecology is central to the interdisciplinary research group Care Ecologies; found during a lockdown in the spring of 2021 and hosted by ARIAS Platform for Research Through the Arts and Sciences in Amsterdam. In Towards Becoming an Ecology of Care group members Valentina Curandi, Inte Gloerich, Ania Molenda, Maaike Muntinga, Natalia Sanchez Querubin, Nienke Scholts and Marloeke van der Vlugt, offer an initial articulation on their approaches and principles – performative practices, reflection, speculations - of what an ecology of care could be. While each bringing in different understandings of care, staying with those differences shaped the ways in which the agenda of the research group has been (un)settled. To exchange knowledge and experiences, the group uses various on- and off-line frameworks, like presentations and practice sessions. Exploring how activities that sustain a research group – coordinating, meeting, writing and documenting – may be done with care, this paper attempts to present a speculative proposition for functioning as a research ecology on and around care. Bringing into focus what care can do, while being attentive to what is neglected. This is not only done in writing but also becomes visible in the accompanying images compiled of material and immaterial memories. It is an ongoing process, for which the writing of this paper became a catalyst for reflection. While not aiming for clear answers the authors invite themselves and others to become more aware, devising and testing work strategies for care-based practices.
DOCUMENT
Hyperparasitoids are some of the most diverse members of insect food webs. True hyperparasitoids parasitize the larvae of other parasitoids, reaching these larvae with their ovipositor through the herbivore that hosts the parasitoid larva. During pupation, primary parasitoids also may be attacked by pseudohyperparasitoids that lay their eggs on the parasitoid (pre)pupae. By attacking primary parasitoids, hyperparasitoids may affect herbivore population dynamics, and they have been identified as a major challenge in biological control. Over the past decades, research, especially on aphid- and caterpillar-associated hyperparasitoids, has revealed that hyperparasitoids challenge rules on nutrient use efficiency in trophic chains, account for herbivore outbreaks, or stabilize competitive interactions in lower trophic levels, and they may use cues derived from complex interaction networks to locate their hosts. This review focuses on the fascinating ecology of hyperparasitoids related to how they exploit and locate their often inconspicuous hosts and the insect community processes in which hyperparasitoids are prominent players.
LINK
By supporting creation of protected areas, conservation projects are known to bring economic prosperity to the local communities, but also incite criticism. A common theme in the critique of conservation organizations is the proximity to neoliberal agencies seeking to capitalize on environment, which disadvantage the local communities. Community participation has been proposed as a panacea for neoliberal conservation. However, conservation efficacy is not always contingent on the community involvement and reliance on ‘traditional’ practices in protected areas has not always benefitted biodiversity. Simultaneously, critique of conservation ignores evidence of indigenous activism as well as alternative forms of environmentalism which provide a broader ethical support base for conservation. This article highlights the challenges and contradictions, as well as offers hopeful directions in order to more effectively ground compassionate conservation. https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2015.1048765 https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
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
