Preservation and conservation: separate disciplines, common goals

Abstract

The conservation of the natural environment and the preservation of the built environment are fields often distinguished from one another both in application and in theory. At academic institutions, courses in preservation and conservation are usually offered in different departments and faculty members concerned with either of the two disciplines are tenured into different departments. Special interest groups usually target either preservation or conservation, reinforcing the notion of separate disciplines and separate causes. In the USA, the distinctions between the fields of preservation and conservation is further exaggerated by other concerns, in the competition to acquire Federal funding. Ironically, both preservationists and conservationists rely heavily on funds funneled through the National Park Service. Despite the dualism presented by the two environmental movements, they in fact have a number of common goals. To reduce the impact and harm of humans on nature, conservationists advocate ways to reduce the amount of solid waste and to conserve energy. Conservation programs, often including recycling campaigns, have gained popular appeal, and yet approximately 30% of landfill in the USA is comprised of previously used and discarded building materials, a fact often marginalized by the popular press and a facet arguably overlooked by conservation groups as well. By bringing preservation and conservation under one environmental banner, a more complete vision of the environment might be possible and the goals of both preservation and conservation might well be achieved.