![]() |
|||
Newsletter
|
|||
|
ICTE Newsletter December 1994 International Center for Tropical Ecology at the University of Missouri - St. Louis
Environmental Justiceby Andrew Hurley, History Department, University of Missouri - St. Louis When five hundred African Americans from Warren County, North Carolina protested the location of a toxic waste disposal facility in their neighborhood in 1982, they had no idea that they were igniting a national and international environmental justice movement. Yet by charging that racist motivations lay behind the siting decision, they awakened minority populations throughout the United States to a pervasive neglect of minority concerns in environmental protection efforts and a systematic skew in the social distribution of hazardous wastes. Over the next decade, dozens of communities witnessed the rise of similar protests among people of color, most notably, African Americans, Native Americans, and Latinos. Identifying themselves as the victims of "environmental racism," these citizen groups mobilized local resources to fight the construction of landfills, incinerators, and other facilities handling hazardous materials. These citizen protests also spawned a plethora of studies that sought to document the dimensions of environmental inequality in the United States, most of which focused on the location of toxic waste dumps. Among early investigations, the most exhaustive and widely publicized was one conducted by the United Church of Christ's Commission for Racial Justice in 1987. Plotting the location of over 15,000 uncontrolled hazardous waste sites and over 200 commercial landfills, the commission demonstrated that environmental racism was rampant across the nation. A follow-up report five years later suggested that in the intervening years, the problem had grown even worse. These findings gave a new bite to the old accusation that those in the forefront of environmental protection were insensitive to the needs and interests of minorities and the poor. Civil rights leaders had long maintained that mainstream conservation groups, dominated by well-to-do suburban whites, had steered the nation's environmental agenda toward issues that had little relevance to those Americans who resided in inner-cities. Accordingly, the federal government channeled resources to programs to protect wilderness areas and purify streams while ignoring problems of the urban poor: inadequate sanitation services, rat infestation, and lead poisoning. The presence of toxic waste sites in so many communities inhabited by minorities and the poor appeared as the most dramatic legacy of an environmental movement that was elitist at its core. Stung by the intensity of these charges, environmental groups and the federal government were quick to respond. Mainstream environmental groups such as Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, and Environmental Defense Fund pledged to incorporate equity issues into their agendas and to place more people of color on their staffs. For its part, the federal government promised to give greater consideration to the social impact of environmental policies; in February 1994, the Clinton administration issued an executive order that required federal agencies to demonstrate that their programs do not inflict unfair environmental burdens on the poor and minorities. Although these concessions were welcomed by environmental justice advocates, the controversy has not subsided. Indeed, the government's pledge to tackle the problem has inspired vigorous and sometimes acrimonious debate regarding the most appropriate solution. Should laws prohibit the siting of environmental hazards in certain neighborhoods? Should afflicted residents be financially compensated? Or would the solution lie in the complete elimination of all toxic hazards? Further complicating the matter, the policy debate has unleashed a new burst of research, some of which has challenged the assumptions and findings of earlier investigations. Several recent studies, for example, have found the correlations between toxic waste dump locations and race to be spurious. Still others have exploded the dimensions of the discourse by bringing to popular attention the fact that environmental discrimination against people of color has not been confined to the United States but can be better understood as a global phenomenon associated with warfare, underground nuclear testing, and the international waste trade. Moreover, it remains to be seen precisely how environmental justice advocates and mainstream ecology activities can fuse their movements as important differences continue to separate their respective approaches. For example, while environmental justice advocates have sought recourse through civil rights laws, environmentalists have generally relied on regulatory mechanisms for protecting air, water, wilderness areas, and endangered species. Residual mistrust and suspicion leaves open the question as to whether the two movements can work together effectively at all. Optimists, however, counter that the justice theme retains the potential for energizing the environmenal movement and creating a new breed of activists who will pay closer attention to the structural relationships that link class, race, political power, and environmental degradation. If the 1980s was marked by America's awakening to the issue of environmental justice, clearly the challenge of the 1990s lies in the more difficult task of finding common ground, building bridges, and devising politically effective solutions.
An Opinion On EcotourismBy David L. Shores Chair, Development Board, International Center for Tropical Ecology Graduate Student, Biology Department, University of Missouri - St. Louis "Ecotourism is responsible travel to natural areas which conserves the environment and improves the welfare of local people."The Ecotourism Society The definition of ecotourism that appears above seems quite simple when first read; however, in my opinion, there are many aspects to consider when one is examining an ecotourism project or ecotourism in general. First, what are the ecological aspects? Are we looking at something that minimizes the possible negative impacts to the environment in general and ecosystems in particular? Environmental damage can occur in many ways and at many different levels. It can be as obvious as litter, trail erosion or widening, water pollution, or even noise pollution. It can be as subtle and pervasive as a change in the behavior of an indigenous species or in the interactions among several species within a community. I feel that it is extremely important to understand the environmental impact of an ecotourism project as thoroughly as possible. How many visitors can an area absorb? What is its "carrying capacity" for tourists? How can tourists be in the vicinity of wildlife without altering the behavior of the animals? I believe that ecotourism is an excellent idea as long as we plan our projects in conjunction with current scientific knowledge of the system and are always alert for any changes that might be occurring. The second area we must always consider, in my opinion, is sociological Ecotourism projects must always be done is a way that minimizes any negative impact on indigenous people. It is important that economic and other benefits be directed to local people in such a way as to maximise their participation. This should include the decision process that determines the kind and amount of tourism that occurs. Traditional practices should be supplemented or complimented without overwhelming them or attempting to replace them. There are many cases where dances or crafts that were about to be lost are being rediscovered because of tourist interests. A major risk of ecotourism comes from the exposure of indigenous people to our western technology and society. Will the native peoples of Peru or the tribesmen of Sumatra be happy with their way of life after seeing ours? What can be done to minimize the impact of visitors on indigenous people? Undoubtably there will always be an impact; however, I feel that is is our responsibility to keep it to a minimum because conservation and tourism that ignore the rights and concerns of local communities are self-defeating, doomed to failure, and unethical. The final aspect to consider is economic. In this area we always have to remember that countries, politicians, and local people generally have choices. What is the highest and best use of a forest? To some the answer is to cut the timber as quickly as possible in order to realize a big return immediately. There are many areas where long-term economic considerations have been brushed aside in order to make a quick profit. For example, this seems to be the current philosophy of the governments of Indonesia and Malaysia, as shown in their timber cutting practices. Ecotourism came about partially as part of an attempt to keep a greater proportion of environmentally-based revenue within the country. Ecotourism is a sustainable development concept that can go on and on throughout time without consuming or destroying the asset. In my opinion it is far better to bring tourists to visit a forest than to cut it down (of course, this assumes that these are the only two choices). Economics teaches us that capital will move to the highest and best use of an asset. I believe that ecotourism can often be the highest and best use of parts of many endangered ecosystems.
The Parker - Gentry Tropical Research FellowshipTwo of the world's most knowledgeable and dedicated field biologists, Ted Parker and Al Gentry, died in a tragic plane accident in Ecuador on August 3, 1993. At the time of the accident, Ted and Al were surveying possible boundaries for a new forest reserve in Ecuador as members of Conservation International's Rapid Assessment Program (RAP). The death of these two outstanding biologists has created a tremendous hole in tropical research and biodiversity conservation during a time when research and policy action are so imperative. To recognize and honor their committment to training and providing opportunities to Latin American scientists, the International Center for Tropical Ecology at the University of Missouri-St. Louis is offering The Parker-Gentry Tropical Research Fellowship to support the field research of a Latin American graduate student. Funds for this special fellowship were made available through the generous contribution of an anonymous donor. Ted Parker, senior scientist at Conservation International, was widely recognized as the most knowledgeable ornithologist of the Neotropics. His contribution to our understanding of the region's avifauna went far beyond his tremendous skills at identifying birds by sight and sound. In addition, Ted was a great natural historian and an impassioned spokesperson for conservation of the flora and fauna of the region. Ted's concerns for conservation were instrumental in his vision and development of the Rapid Assessment Program of Conservation International. Al Gentry, senior curator at the Missouri Botanical Garden, was unmatched in his ability to identify Neotropical plants and his contributions to herbaria and the botanical and ecological literature were immense. His recently published volume, A Field Guide to Woody Plants of Northwest South America, is an invaluable source of information for students of the region's flora and will likely remain the single most important volume of the region's flora for many decades to come. Both Ted and Al were magnets for students of tropical biology. Each of them recognized the importance of training the next generation and each gave so freely of their time and knowledge. Almost without exception, they were accompanied on their field trips to South and Central America by local scientists. The intent of The Parker-Gentry Tropical Research Fellowship is to provide opportunities for students of tropical biology and conservation to conduct research leading to an advanced degree. Conditions for eligibility are current enrollment in the graduate program in Biology at the University of Missouri-St. Louis, and a project in one of the following countries - Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Peru, or Nicaragua. Latin American students have been targeted in recognition of Ted and Al's research in and fondness for neotropical countries. Research monies from The Parker-Gentry Tropical Research Fellowship are to be used for expenses associated with field research in these countries. Application materials are available from the International Center for Tropical Ecology at the University of Missouri-St. Louis. The Neotropics harbor much of the world's biodiversity, yet our understanding of the biota and complexity of tropical ecosystems is still very incomplete. Ted and Al's research form much of the core of what we know about the Neotropics today. Given the knowledge that still needs to be gathered and the urgency with which we must work in order to conserve the region's diverse ecosystems before they disappear forever, we hope that The Parker- Gentry Tropical Research Fellowship will be instrumental in fostering the next generation of tropical biologists.
A Primeval Cloud Forest Overlooking the Amazon BasinReady for biotic researchers and conservation biologists
|
|||
|