The conservation “myths” we live by: Reimagining human–nature relationships within the Scottish marine policy context

Abstract

There are growing calls for the articulation and consideration of different value systems and emotions in shaping conservation and natural resource management decisions and participatory resource governance. This requires recognition of the socio-cultural relations attached to landscape and seascape in marine conservation policy. Taking into account the relationship between the socio-natural environment and socio-political institutions and processes complicates conservation. Making human values and assumptions explicit within the conservation discourse reveals the inadequacy of conservation that is focused on a biodiversity that is framed only as other-than-human nature. This paper considers how the perceived separation between nature and culture underpinning conservation policy and practice exacerbated a conflict between members of a small Scottish island community and the Scottish Government around the creation of a marine protected area (MPA) off the coast of the island. A rich maritime heritage and a distinctive way of knowing the sea suggested the presence of embedded values that appeared to be colliding with values driving the MPA designation process. Social, historical and cultural forces have shaped the perceptions of landscape and seascape of many of the islanders and can help to explain the local resistance to the MPA.Visual participatory methods were used to explore local understandings of the meaning of conservation. The case-study offers insights into different ways in which marine spaces are conceptualised and how this relates to marine resource governance. It contributes to a more complete understanding of human relations with the marine environment in the context of a marine conservation conflict.

Humanities for the Environment 2018 Report—Ways to Here, Ways Forward

“…Little concludes that grappling with this internal complexity serves to sharpen the focus on disciplinary strengths and weaknesses, and thus clarify the contribution that the humanities can make to societal challenges such as the transition to renewable energy sources to mitigate climate change. Holm et al (2013) join other scholars (e.g., Billing et al 2017;Brennan, forthcoming;Castree et al 2014;Kitch 2017;Nightingale 2014) in arguing for opening up the ways in which 'natural' environments are framed by acknowledging how human value systems, practices, imaginations and identities have shaped them. Yet, the dominant narrative in the environmental policy sphere tends to treat humans and nature as essentially separate by assuming that other-than-human nature can be defined separately from human culture (Billing et al 2017;Brechin et al 2002;Peterson et al 2010).…”

Re-storying marine conservation: Integrating art and science to explore and articulate ideas, visions and expressions of marine space

“…Government maps depicting the proposed areas for designation focused exclusively on physical features and biological diversity. The cultural diversity of these areas was neither visible or formally considered (Brennan, 2018). Barra was chosen as the case study site for several reasons.…”

“…The question of whether environmental change is good or bad is decided by different human value systems -it is a matter of societal choice how the world we live in ought to be (Brennan, 2018;Cote and Nightingale 2012;Cronon 1992;Mee et al, 2008). However, the conservation policy narrative tends to be presented as what is objectively needed, without questioning the politics of the particular ways in which conservation issues and policies are framed (see, for example, Dove et al, 2011;O'Neill, 2001;Nightingale, 2013;Schultz et al, 2005).…”

“…For example, a participatory mapping process might highlight a fear that a conservation initiative could result in loss of local control over marine resources and/or change the prevailing socio-cultural context. There is increasing recognition that marine spaces are socially produced (see Brennan, 2018;Rossiter et al, 2015). Maps can produce reality as much as represent it through the choices made about what is, and is not, represented on a map (Crampton, 2001;Smith and Brennan, 2012).…”

“…They created space for islanders to articulate and value aspects of their cultural heritage which co-exist with the bio-physical heritage being protected by the (then) proposed marine protected areas. This acknowledgement of different ways of knowing the marine environment encouraged and supported a dialogue between the Scottish Government and key people on Barra that eventually led to a government-supported and community-led co-management process for the Sound of Barra mSAC that recognises the social relations which form part of the island's socio-ecological system (see Brennan, 2018). This paper adopts a narrative format.…”