Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Interdisciplinary training in environmental conservation: definitions, progress and future directions

By Helen S. Newing

Abstract

The development of interdisciplinary approaches to\ud environmental conservation is obviously related to\ud interdisciplinary training in undergraduate and postgraduate\ud conservation-oriented degree programmes.\ud This paper therefore examines interdisciplinary\ud training in environmental conservation, with a focus on\ud conservation biology. The specific objectives are: (1) to\ud analyse debates about the nature of ‘interdisciplinarity’\ud in conservation biology; (2) to examine the status\ud of interdisciplinary training in current academic\ud programmes in conservation biology; and (3) to\ud make recommendations in terms of interdisciplinary\ud or other non-natural science content that should\ud be prioritized for inclusion in the curriculum. The\ud term ‘interdisciplinarity’ has been used in relation to\ud conservation training to refer to (1) any social science\ud content; (2) vocational skills training; (3) integrative\ud or practice-based exercises, sometimes with no\ud indication of disciplinary content; (4) the (variously\ud defined) ‘human dimensions’ of conservation, and\ud (5) interaction between different academic disciplines\ud (usually crossing the natural science–social science\ud divide). In terms of training, the natural sciences\ud have remained predominant in almost all reported\ud academic programmes, but there now appears to be\ud more coverage of non-natural science issues than\ud previously. However the lack of consistency in the\ud use of terms makes it difficult to assess progress.\ud Further debate about curriculum development in\ud conservation would be aided greatly by recognizing\ud the distinction between the different aspects of\ud non-natural science training, and treating each of\ud them in its own right. Most degree programmes in\ud environment-related disciplines specialize to varying\ud degrees either in the natural sciences or the social\ud sciences, and a comprehensive programme covering\ud both of these in depth is likely to be problematic.\ud However, some understanding of different disciplinary\ud ∗Correspondence: Dr Helen Newing Tel: + 44 1227 827034 Fax:\ud + 44 1227 827289 e-mail: H.S.Newing@kent.ac.uk\ud perspectives is increasingly important in a career\ud in environmental conservation, and it is argued\ud that, as a minimum, a primarily natural sciencebased\ud undergraduate programme in environmental\ud conservation should include: (1) an introduction to\ud social science perspectives on the environment; (2)\ud basic training in social science methods, research\ud design and science theory; (3) vocational skills\ud training, to the extent that it can be built into\ud existing curricular components; and (4) integrative\ud problem-solving tasks that can be used in relation\ud to any or all of the above. A similar list could be\ud constructed for social science-based environmental\ud degree programmes, incorporating somebasic training\ud in natural science perspectives. Postgraduate training\ud programmes are more varied in what they aim to\ud achieve in terms of disciplinary breadth; they can\ud develop students’ existing specialist expertise, offer\ud supplementary training to allow students to increase\ud the disciplinary breadth of their expertise, or focus on\ud the issue of interdisciplinarity itself

Topics: G, G1, GE, LB2300, LB2361, SD
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Year: 2010
OAI identifier: oai:kar.kent.ac.uk:28226
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S037... (external link)
  • Suggested articles


    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.