Listed below are several items from CEN #27, the Spring, 1996 issue of the Cultural Ecology Newsletter.
San Francisco, Chicago, Charlotte - it has kind of a counter (Bishop) Berkeleyan drift to it - as well as serving as the sites of the three last AAG meetings, and perforce the last three CESG business meetings. As chair, my term comes to a close with the Charlotte meeting (or shortly thereafter). I suppose this is the occasion for stock taking, but beyond reporting a continuing upward, though probably not westward, trend in numbers, and a healthy roster of sponsored sessions, I can't reflect back on any startling new developments, threatened defections, or even heated debates in our sub field or specialty group. In terms of cultural ecology, the mid-years of this decade would seem to have been rather placid ones.
The beginning to the decade portended more. From one side an emergent political ecology offered explicit challenges and potential revitalization. From another angle, the "cultural turn" within the social sciences (and the postmodern de(con)struction derbies on all academic margins) promised complex reorderings (or simple disorder) depending on one"s perspective. From yet another vantage point one might have foreseen a makeover/takeover of the field by eco-technocrats, whether rooted in an ethos of "sustainability" or in supply-side science with its laser-like focus on scarce funding sources. Yet none of this has really come to pass. Aspects of these alternatives have made their impacts, but in the main, cultural ecology largely continues on a trajectory that was set in its basic directions long ago.
One of its culture hearths was certainly Berkeleyan (not the idealist variety). Between Steward and Sauer much of the groundwork for cultural ecological geographers was laid. From there a strong imperative to do work beyond modernity's edges was forged. To our credit we continue to be the non-regional specialty group most actively involved with field research in foreign areas and with what little remains of "pre-modernity" (both in its survivals and its signatures). We continue to serve as one of geography's most constructive bridges between the social and physical sciences. And it remains that we have a productive and powerful set of approaches for grappling with a wide range of nature-society questions and problems. Given all this, should we simply stay the course and do more of the same? For some of us the answer should be "yes." Core was the term Steward used to bound the coupling of culture and ecology. Cultural ecology"s own core activities need to be recognized by all and attended to by those so disposed. Beyond this there is room for all manner of adaptations. So for others, the answer to the above question should and will be "no."
As for prescription, I think that is better left to each on her or his own. As for prospection, of course I have some ideas (none novel) of what might be worthy sites and situations for future research. First, the notion of "site" should be considered across the total expanse of geographic scales. As a sub discipline cultural ecology has moved from the micro- to meso-scaled research with considerable success. Moving from there on to macro- and global-focused research has been more daunting - or perhaps simply less appealing. With the notable exception of Kates, Turner and a few others, engaging the challenges of working at these largest scales has not enlisted as many cultural ecologists as one might expect given the funding and collaborative opportunities in this arena. Second, considering "situation" in its geographic and temporal senses, new research opportunities are constantly emerging at all scales. Again, to point to a few that are, or soon will be, demanding attention (with various patrons ready to support research) they include the so-called "soft national security threats" i.e. environmental degradation as causative factor in international conflict(s), and in the continued devolutionary forces at work in most of the worldÕs present nation states. Cognate questions and problems can be identified at lesser scales. All will require blurring the boundaries between onceptualizations of what is "cultural," "ecological," and "political." The political ecologists among us have been working on this for awhile now; they can show interested others some of the ways to proceed. At the same time, quite new approaches will emerge. As long as some tend to the hearth, and others forage widely - even wildly - cultural ecology will be in good shape.
- Kent Mathewson.
The 1995 CESG business meeting was held on March 15 during the annual AAG Meeting at Chicago. The following members were present: N. Allan, M. Batek, M. Blumler, B. Brower, J. Brown, K. Butzer, E. Butzer, O. Coomes, S. Dedina, B. Denevan, B. Doolittle, N. Dunning, P. Fall, R. Ford, B. Gartner, L. Greenberg, J. Guthman, S. Hoffmann, D. Johnson, G. Knapp, B. Kuhlken, D. Lambert, R. Langstroth, J. Lilien, T. Mack, K. Mathewson, M. Meade, J. Metz, J. Parsons, K. Patterson, P. Porman, P. Porter, S. Rainey, P. Robbins, A. Sluyter, P. Starrs, M. Steinberg, C. Thorburn, B.L. Turner II, S. Washburn, T. Whitmore, E. Young.
Among the several items of interest discussed during the course of the meeting:
B.L. Turner II, founding member of the Cultural Ecology Specialty Group, was recently elected to the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy is perhaps the most prestigious elective body to which a U.S. scientist can belong. Relatively few geographers have belonged since its establishment by President Lincoln in 1863. Turner joins eight other current geographers: B.L.J. Berry, J.R. Borchert, W. Isard, R.W. Kates, W.R. Tobler, G.F. White, M.G. Wolman, and J. Wolpert. Turner is the third member of the CESG to receive this honor (along with Kates and White). The only other specialty group with more members is Natural Hazards.
Turner is well known for his pioneering research on agricultural terraces and raised fields in the Maya lowlands, theoretical contributions to cultural ecology, and more recently, his leadership roles in the study of the human dimensions of global environmental change. He is the author of numerous journal articles, and Once beneath the Forest, and co-editor of Pre-Hispanic Maya Agriculture; Comparative Farming Systems; The Earth as Transformed by Human Action; Population Growth and Agricultural Change in Africa; Changes in land Use and Land Cover: A Global Perspective; and Regions at Risk. He is currently Alice C. Higgins Professor of Environment and Society, and Director, George Perkins Marsh Institute, Clark University. Congratulations Billie Lee!
Congratulations are in order for four student members of the CESG, for winning awards in the categories listed below.
The CESG also instituted a new competition for best fieldwork proposal, an award that was proposed and approved at the 1994 business meeting in San Francisco. The award carries a maximum $500 prize with the main objective being to defray travel expenses for intended thesis or dissertation research. There were two awards presented for 1995:
El Salvador. Adam Kufeld, Arnoldo Ramos and Manlio Argueta. 183 pp., illus. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1990.
Review by Dean Lambert, Oklahoma State University
For more than a decade the people of El Salvador endured a civil war which was perpetuated by forces inside and outside the region. Kufeld has skillfully documented the faces of this conflict with his collection of black-and-white photographs. Although he used 35mm cameras and existing light, most of the images are sharp and well-composed. The photographs are accompanied by a 22-page introduction by Arnoldo Ramos, and seven poems by Manlio Argueta. Ramos briefly discusses the history of El Salvador, setting the stage for the photographic essay which follows. Through a political point of view which is essentially left-of-center, Ramos elucidates the events and processes that led to the civil war during the late 1970s and early 1980s. He discusses the inequities of the 19th century encomienda system, the rise of military rule during the 1930s and its perpetuation through the Salvadoran military academy and corps indoctrination, the decline of coffee, cotton, and sugar prices, the economic turmoil of the 1960s and 1970s, and the rise of political opposition within agrarian, labor, and religious organizations. The poems by Argueta, which preface each section of the book, add powerful detail to the texture of the photographs. They also serve as a creative expression of some of the feelings of the Salvadoran people.
The photographic essay is organized into six sections, each with a different theme. The first section, 'day to day,' portrays Salvadorans working their farms, building their homes, and coping with violence in their communities. 'In the mountains' candidly reveals the faces of the rebels; men, boys, and young women who were training for their struggle in the cities. The third section, 'refugees and the displaced,' touches on the lives of the Salvadoran citizens who were driven from their homes by threats, rifles, or bombs. These people, who were already economically and politically disadvantaged, were forced to live in refugee camps in El Salvador and Honduras. The 'journey home' captures events as some of the refugees were escorted by the United Nations in 1987 to uncertain futures in their former communities. These immigrants faced roadblocks, the loss of their homes, and a renewal of hostilities in still-contested portions of the country. 'In the streets' documents the courageous protests of supporters of Archbishop Romero, laborers, farmers, and mothers of the 'disappeared.' 'The offensive' graphically illustrates the last major military attempt of the FMLN rebels to influence political processes in El Salvador. This offensive, which took place in late 1989, was a major effort to dislodge the military elite from power. Both the poor and wealthy neighborhoods of San Salvador served as battlegrounds for this conflict. Photographs of dead and injured rebels, soldiers, and civilians make this the most graphic section of the book.
There are two possible criticisms, or more accurately, concerns about this powerful visual work. First, the political slant of the book appears to minimize the impact that the strife has had on people other than the poor. Many of the soldiers, most of whom were conscripts, suffered from confusion and guilt associated with their role in the conflict. Also, the middle class, and to a lesser degree the elite were caught in a nation that was tearing itself apart, each suffering in their own way. The universal impact of this war, however, should in no way diminish the extreme hardship experienced by the poor and powerless of El Salvador.
A second concern is that the specialized nature of the book's subject matter and the relative ignorance of the American public about affairs in Latin America may make the book limited in appeal and circulation. This is not a criticism of the book, but rather a concern that North Americans can have such powerful impacts on people and lands about which they know little. In sum, this book serves as a poignant, graphic, and well-crafted synthesis of the violence and hardship that have plagued the people of El Salvador.
Changes in Land Use and Land Cover: A Global Perspective , William B. Meyer and B.L. Turner II. 537pp.; maps, illus., tables, bibliog., index. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-47085-4
Reviewed by William E. Doolittle, University of Texas
Since 1986 the Office for Interdisciplinary Earth Studies (OIES) at the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research has organized a series of two-week summer Global Change Institutes at Snowmass, Colorado. The fourth such institute, held in 1991, was the first to involve social scientists as well as physical scientists in a truly interdisciplinary forum to examine both the human causes and global consequences of altered land use patterns on the planet. Changes in Land Use and Land Cover is comprised of the papers delivered at, and the findings of, that workshop. .The book consists of 17 chapters broken into six parts, plus two appendices. The first part, which is also the first chapter outlines the thrust of the volume. Co-authored by the editors, it makes the distinction between land cover, typically the domain of physical scientists, and land use, usually the realm of social scientists. Particularly insightful is the dichotomization of land cover changes: conversion and modification. The former is a change from one class of land cover to another (e.g., from grassland to cropland), while the latter is a change of condition within a land cover category (e.g., the thinning of a forest). Relationships between land cover and land use are demonstrated to be even more complex and multifaceted than previously thought.
Part II consists of three chapters which are the individual reports of working groups on land use/cover change. The first group was charged with the responsibility of creating a "wiring diagram" for such studies. The result of the group's effort is a systems diagram which identifies the critical components and flows at the local, regional, and global levels, and for social drivers, decision-making processes, and biogeochemical factors. The eight modules which constitute the diagram are discussed independently, resulting in a very complex relationships being easily comprehended. Indeed, this chapter, by itself, would make an important contribution to any advanced undergraduate class dealing with nature-society interactions. Chapter 3 constructs a typology and regionalization of change. The group commissioned with the task drew-up a three-dimensional model (cube) with drivers, processes, and land cover types, represented on each of the respective axes.
A temporal dimension is discussed but not modeled. The chapter ends in a most innovative way; with case-study application of the model to four different areas. The third working group had the most difficult of tasks; anticipate changes to occur during the next several decades. So difficult was this task that it resulted principally in a consideration of things that must be considered in order to make appropriate plans. This chapter is actually quite interesting in that it articulates the strengths and weaknesses with various individual strategies. It also shows how shortcomings can be mitigated by using a variety of data and models. .The three chapters that make up the third part of the tome examine global and world- region changes in three broad land types: forest/woodland, grassland, and settlement. The first two are clearly global and the emphasis is on land cover. The third represents the most intensive form of land use. Each contains a wealth of information, often elucidating some factor that is traditionally overlooked or under appreciated. For example, the chapter on forests points out the huge impact of fuelwood gathering and charcoal making, and it factors in reforestation. Likewise, the chapter on settlements highlights the problem of distinguishing land cover from land use in urban environments.
Physical geographers are sure to find the three chapters that comprise Part IV of great interest. One deals with atmospheric chemistry and air quality, one with soils, and one with hydrology and water quality. Each demonstrates how land cover alterations inadvertently set in motion further, secondary, processes of environmental change. Also, although many land cover changes do not constitute environmental degradation in their own right, they begin to do so when the full sum of their consequences is added up. .The four chapters making-up the fifth part of this book will be familiar to human geographers as they each deal with a specific driving force of change. One covers population and income, one focuses on technology, one treats political and economic institutions, and one discusses culture and culture change. Each successfully addresses how some proposed forces are usually dismissed without consideration while the importance of others is taken for granted. Not atypically, both positions are simplistic at best, and totally wrong at worst. As a unit, these chapters suggest that though much has been asserted, little is actually known, and promising avenues exist for future studies. Graduate students in search of theses or dissertation topics will do themselves a great favor by giving these chapters careful inspection.
Three participants were asked to reflect not on substantive issues, but rather on data and modeling matters of land use/cover change from the perspectives of social and natural sciences. One chapter in Part VI deals with land-atmosphere interactions exclusively. The second explores an integrated social framework for understanding global change. And, finally, the last chapter in this section examines the acquisition, assessment, and analysis of data. One theme pervades these chapters--modeling, which is intended to simplify complex relationships, is much more difficult than even the most skillful research may think in no small way because global data are difficult to define. For all their shortcomings, however, data and models need to be employed. Two participants provide a great service in conclusion by presenting a directory of data collections useful for analyses of land use/cover and changes therein. This directory is Appendix I. Appendix II is a list of the 50 workshop participants and their addresses.
This is an excellent volume in numerous respects, and should be attractive to numerous geographers, not the least of whom are those cultural ecologists who have been demanding that more attention be paid to nature-society interactions at scales greater than the local or community level. This book breaks new ground and shatters tradition by focusing on the world as a whole. Its subtitle, A Global Perspective, may, however, be somewhat misleading to most geographers, and this undoubtedly rests in the fact that only one-fifth of the institute's participants are members of our discipline. For better or worse, this book is not an inventory and prospects volume. It focuses not on space or regions, but on interaction s and models.
This page maintained by Robert Kuhlken, assistant professor of
geography at Central Washington University.
Return to CEN