Making ‘Conservation’ Work for the 21st Century – Enabling Resilient Place

Jerrold A. Long
{"title":"Making ‘Conservation’ Work for the 21st Century – Enabling Resilient Place","authors":"Jerrold A. Long","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2409255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During the New Deal, as part of a larger effort implementing Progressive-era “conservation�? regimes, the federal government authorized the structurally-invasive Flood Control Act of 1936. At the same time, the Standard State Soil Conservation Districts Law promoted the creation of local, place-based efforts to protect or restore locally-valued resources. “Conservation�? thus came to signify both the invasive, structural, engineering approach of mid-20th Century flood control, and the local, more responsive and flexible nature of soil conservation districts. But our understandings of our place in the natural world have changed subtly but significantly over the past century. Any legitimate natural resource regime must achieve its resource management goals while balancing its demands with local cultural expectations, which now generally include some desire to protect the natural environment. This article argues – using a case study focused on a small flood control district – that local conservation districts can be used to implement 21st-Century understandings of “conservation�? that more accurately reflect local culture and needs. These locally-driven and place-based conservation efforts can improve and protect the aesthetic, health, ecological, and economic resources of a particular landscape, even as they manage that landscape – in part – to satisfy human needs. A system succeeding on all goals would be truly socio-ecologically resilient, promoting resilient ecosystems, a resilient local culture and economy, and a resilient local legal system – together creating a resilient place.","PeriodicalId":365212,"journal":{"name":"Environment & Natural Resources eJournal","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment & Natural Resources eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2409255","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

During the New Deal, as part of a larger effort implementing Progressive-era “conservation�? regimes, the federal government authorized the structurally-invasive Flood Control Act of 1936. At the same time, the Standard State Soil Conservation Districts Law promoted the creation of local, place-based efforts to protect or restore locally-valued resources. “Conservation�? thus came to signify both the invasive, structural, engineering approach of mid-20th Century flood control, and the local, more responsive and flexible nature of soil conservation districts. But our understandings of our place in the natural world have changed subtly but significantly over the past century. Any legitimate natural resource regime must achieve its resource management goals while balancing its demands with local cultural expectations, which now generally include some desire to protect the natural environment. This article argues – using a case study focused on a small flood control district – that local conservation districts can be used to implement 21st-Century understandings of “conservation�? that more accurately reflect local culture and needs. These locally-driven and place-based conservation efforts can improve and protect the aesthetic, health, ecological, and economic resources of a particular landscape, even as they manage that landscape – in part – to satisfy human needs. A system succeeding on all goals would be truly socio-ecologically resilient, promoting resilient ecosystems, a resilient local culture and economy, and a resilient local legal system – together creating a resilient place.
使“自然保护”为21世纪服务——使地方具有复原力
在新政期间,作为实施进步时代“保护”的更大努力的一部分?1936年,联邦政府批准了《结构侵入性洪水控制法》。与此同时,《标准州土壤保育区法》促进了以地方为基础的努力,以保护或恢复当地有价值的资源。“保护�?因此,它象征着20世纪中期入侵式的、结构式的、工程式的防洪方法,以及土壤保持区的地方性、反应性和灵活性。但在过去的一个世纪里,我们对自己在自然界中的位置的理解发生了微妙但重大的变化。任何合法的自然资源制度都必须实现其资源管理目标,同时平衡其需求与当地文化期望之间的关系,现在这种期望通常包括保护自然环境的愿望。本文通过对一个小型防洪区的案例研究,论证了地方保护区可以用来实施21世纪对“保护”的理解。更准确地反映当地文化和需求。这些以地方为基础的保护工作可以改善和保护特定景观的美学、健康、生态和经济资源,即使它们在一定程度上管理该景观是为了满足人类的需求。一个在所有目标上都取得成功的系统将具有真正的社会生态弹性,促进有弹性的生态系统、有弹性的地方文化和经济,以及有弹性的地方法律体系——共同创造一个有弹性的地方。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信