From grief to hope in conservation

Fischer, Joern; Riechers, Maraja

doi:10.1111/cobi.13737

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We as sustainability researchers routinely investigate deeply troubling, unjust and unsustainable developments and relations. Hence, it is very likely that we experience strong feelings of anger, hopelessness, despair, grief, or frustration, which are common among people who know too much about sustainability crises (Fischer and Riechers 2021 ; Haraway 2016 ). By often side-lining the expression of emotions to the private sphere, however, we defer to modern science’s spurious claim to objectivity and in doing so, we deny emotions their ability to act as driving forces for doing research.…”

Section: Promising Potentials For a Feminist-infused Transdisciplinary Sustainability Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

A feminist ethos for caring knowledge production in transdisciplinary sustainability science

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transdisciplinary Sustainability Science has emerged as a viable answer to current sustainability crises with the aim to strengthen collaborative knowledge production. To expand its transformative potential, we argue that Transdisciplinary Sustainability Science needs to thoroughly engage with questions of unequal power relations and hierarchical scientific constructs. Drawing on the work of the feminist philosopher María Puig de la Bellacasa, we examine a feminist ethos of care which might provide useful guidance for sustainability researchers who are interested in generating critical-emancipatory knowledge. A feminist ethos of care is constituted by three interrelated modes of knowledge production: (1) thinking-with, (2) dissenting-within and (3) thinking-for. These modes of thinking and knowing enrich knowledge co-production in Transdisciplinary Sustainability Science by (i) embracing relational ontologies, (ii) relating to the ‘other than human’, (iii) cultivating caring academic cultures, (iv) taking care of non-academic research partners, (v) engaging with conflict and difference, (vi) interrogating positionalities and power relations through reflexivity, (vii) building upon marginalised knowledges via feminist standpoints and (viii) countering epistemic violence within and beyond academia. With our paper, we aim to make a specific feminist contribution to the field of Transdisciplinary Sustainability Science and emphasise its potentials to advance this field.

show abstract

Section: Promising Potentials For a Feminist-infused Transdisciplinary Sustainability Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

A feminist ethos for caring knowledge production in transdisciplinary sustainability science

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A survey of over 2300 conservationists showed that many did not expect pressures on biodiversity to lessen or its overall status to improve over the next 10 years (Pienkowski, Keane, de Lange, et al., 2022). In this context, many conservationists, who are often passionate about the state of nature (Sandbrook, 2019), may feel grief at witnessing biodiversity loss and the prospect of this loss continuing (Fischer & Riechers, 2021). Perhaps in response, movements such as conservation optimism, earth optimism, and vikalp sangam have emerged.…”

Section: Six Emerging Themes From Reflexivity In Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Recognizing reflexivity among conservation practitioners

Pienkowski

Kiik

Catalano

et al. 2023

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When deciding how to conserve biodiversity, practitioners navigate diverse missions, sometimes conflicting approaches, and uncertain trade‐offs. These choices are based not only on evidence, funders’ priorities, stakeholders’ interests, and policies, but also on practitioners’ personal experiences, backgrounds, and values. Calls for greater reflexivity—an individual or group's ability to examine themselves in relation to their actions and interactions with others—have appeared in the conservation science literature. But what role does reflexivity play in conservation practice? We explored how self‐reflection can shape how individuals and groups conserve nature. To provide examples of reflexivity in conservation practice, we conducted a year‐long series of workshop discussions and online exchanges. During these, we examined cases from the peer‐reviewed and gray literature, our own experiences, and conversations with 10 experts. Reflexivity among practitioners spanned individual and collective levels and informal and formal settings. Reflexivity also encompassed diverse themes, including practitioners’ values, emotional struggles, social identities, training, cultural backgrounds, and experiences of success and failure. Reflexive processes also have limitations, dangers, and costs. Informal and institutionalized reflexivity requires allocation of limited time and resources, can be hard to put into practice, and alone cannot solve conservation challenges. Yet, when intentionally undertaken, reflexive processes might be integrated into adaptive management cycles at multiple points, helping conservation practitioners better reach their goals. Reflexivity could also play a more transformative role in conservation by motivating practitioners to reevaluate their goals and methods entirely. Reflexivity might help the conservation movement imagine and thus work toward a better world for wildlife, people, and the conservation sector itself.

show abstract