Republicans in the Wild: Issue Realignment in the Republican Party on Public Land Policy

The Republican Party is often seen as the bane of protective environmental policies, and is associated with opening public land in the West to private oil interests, endorsing pipeline construction on federal lands, and permitting road development in wilderness areas. Throughout history, however, the Republican Party has not always worked for such brazen anti-environment causes, and some of America’s most formative protective land policies emerged under Republican leadership. If this is the case, how has the Republican Party realigned on protective public lands policy in the Republican electorate, government, and party organization with time? This investigation reviews the proportion of protective public lands policy stances and actions observed in these three levels of the Republican Party since the 1970s. It finds a distinct shift in policy action motivated by Republican elites within the Party organization, and suggests that Republicans have decreased their interest in protecting public lands and wilderness

What\u27s a Winter Greenhouse? A look inside the student-run Full Circle Greenhouse

The gardening season at the College of Saint Benedict is about to be expanded to all four seasons with the completion of the Full Circle Greenhouse! The project started a few years ago, when a small group of students learned about a passive solar greenhouse in northern Minnesota and was inspired to try to make their own. After two years of planning, consulting, fundraising, and a lot of hard work, these students have finally realized their goal! Construction on the greenhouse began July 19, 2013, and the Full Circle team is beginning operations this semester (fall 2013). Come learn from Full Circle members Stephanie Pinkalla and Connor Klausing about how a passive solar greenhouse works, what it took to get it constructed, and how you can get involved now

The Production of Knowledge in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been producing reports assessing the state of climate science since 1990. IPCC assessors consist of scientists nominated by their governments, who perform the work of assessing all of the peer-reviewed literature on their topic on a volunteer basis for the purpose of compiling the state of climate science into a single set of documents. In this project, researchers O\u27Reilly and Pinkalla are interested in conflict and consensus within the scientific community-those people who accept the reality of anthropogenic climate change and have stakes in ascertaining that the most recent scientific findings are presented clearly to policy makers. To study this, the researchers analyzed the archived draft review comments for Fourth Assessment Report (AR4). Anyone can nominate themselves to serve as expert reviewers of the draft IPCC reports and the authors are required to respond to each comment submitted. We categorized levels of conflict through the draft report comments and pieced together a trajectory showing how the reviewers and authors interacted to produce the final IPCC assessment report documents. As we did this, we characterized how politics at multiple scales shape a purportedly policy-neutral document and how climate scientists grapple with interjections from climate denialists out of the public eye. Ultimately, our study demonstrates how a diverse community of experts works discursively to produce knowledge while navigating the sociocultural dynamics associated with politically important scientific facts

Making the World a Wilder Place: The World Wilderness Congress and Public Perceptions of Antarctic Wilderness

The World Wilderness Congress is a forum for people interested in wilderness protection, from policymakers to indigenous groups, and is noted as the world\u27s longest running conservation project. In addition, the Congress holds an academic conference to promote the sharing of knowledge and research regarding wild land conservation from a multitude of representatives from different countries and organizations. As participants in the 2013 World Wilderness Congress in Salamanca, Spain, student researchers Kelly, Larrea, and Pinkalla (under the supervision of anthropologist Jessica O\u27Reilly) experienced firsthand the political climate surrounding the international conversation on wilderness policy and protection. The student researchers also presented their original research findings to the World Wilderness Congress. Their major project was to conduct recorded interviews on public perceptions of Antarctic wilderness and analyze their results. This interview project is part of a multiyear, international initiative to provide public input on Antarctic wilderness management issues. Our Thursday Forum provides a brief overview of our research as well as discusses our broader experience at the World Wilderness Congress: the issues that international conservationists are discussing today, the challenges facing global wilderness preservation, and what we at CSB/SJU can do to protect wilderness at home and abroad

Perceptions of wilderness and the Antarctic: case studies from the United States

Wilderness is a vital Antarctic symbol. The United States’ extensive experience of wilderness protection at home and long-standing engagement in the Antarctic Treaty System make it an ideal candidate to galvanise support in the protection of Antarctica’s wilderness values. As a democracy, the nation’s policies can be influenced by its people’s values. This study aims to contribute to the protection of Antarctica’s wilderness values by examining the interrelationships between some Americans’ perceptions of wilderness and Antarctica and wilderness management in the US. Using ethnographic interviews and questionnaires, we collected information on perceptions of wilderness in general, and the Antarctic wilderness in particular, from university students and community members in the southern and Midwestern US on three occasions between 2012 and 2013. A total of 462 responses were analysed. Participants had low levels of knowledge about Antarctica. They relied on their cultural understandings of wilderness, which were distinctly American, to conceptualise Antarctica’s wilderness values. Many participants expressed a desire to maintain and protect wilderness areas from development, protect animal species and refrain from degradation of the land. The majority of participants stated that the importance of Antarctica lies in it being one of the world’s last great wildernesses and an important component of the Earth’s climate system. An overwhelming majority supported designating Antarctica as a wilderness reserve where development of infrastructure is limited. Furthermore, study participants’ low levels of knowledge about Antarctica and the complex relationships between science, Antarctica and climate change raise questions about forms of governance and human engagement in the Antarctic wilderness that can be truly of interest to humankind