4 research outputs found

    Volunteers on the political anvil: citizenship and volunteer biodiversity monitoring in three postcommunist countries

    No full text
    We present comparative ethnographic material on volunteer biodiversity monitoring from environmental organisations in three postcommunist countries: Poland, Slovenia, and Lithuania. We chart and discuss aspects of the heritage from socialism and communist rule in terms of their effect on the present-day running and operations of four case-study organisations in these countries, focusing particularly on challenges posed by the legacy of compulsory volunteering, inherited organisational cultures, economic reorganisation, and internationalisation of the volunteering sector. In closing we indicate certain key differences between our case-study organisations, focusing on factors that influenced their ability to operate in the postcommunist nongovernmental organisation sector, and offer some observations of more general relevance.

    Cultural Diversity Issues in Biodiversity Monitoring—Cases of Lithuania, Poland and Denmark

    Get PDF
    Public participation is a key element in nature conservation in Europe and a necessity for collecting broad scale data on biodiversity and its dynamics. However, vast societal differences exist between eastern and western European countries, resulting in problems for public participation in post-communist states as compared to western countries. Here, we compare diversity in monitoring practices and public participation in countries with different political histories. Drawing on in-depth ethnographic studies conducted in Lithuania and Poland, as well as a rapid assessment in Denmark, we have focused on the historical, cultural and social determinants of the volunteers’ participation in biodiversity monitoring. Our results indicate the reasons why volunteer involvement—as an expression of a participatory approach—has a lower incidence in the post-communist countries, compared to voluntarism common in occidental democracies. We discuss our results in the context of the main social factors considered to be a legacy of the Soviet regime
    corecore