Ecological guidelines and traditional empiricism in rural development acknowledgements

Summary

Ecological science, as a science in its own right and as a link between the natural and social sciences, is now undergoing rapid development. This is partly due to challenges to ecological methods raised by developing countries over the last decade since the Stockholm Conference through the activities of UNEP, IUCN, MAB etc..

In the developed countries, the general ineffectiveness of environmental impact assessment can be traced to failure to apply a holistic approach to the study of the total (human and biophysical) environment. In the developing countries, analytical scientific methods have also been found to be ineffective in understanding and communicating traditional ecological wisdom, despite some attention to eco-development etc.. Despite these deficiencies, the seeds for formulating holistic approaches already exist in different countries, and ways must be found to germinate them.

It is now realized that there is confusion and controversy about definitions of conservation. For example, some definitions seem to put a higher priority on the welfare of wildlife than of people. There is also dissatisfaction among people in all countries with value systems that distort the man-nature relationship. This relationship seems to remain one of the most contentious issues in conservation and development. Earlier interpretations of the philosophy of conservation and associated ecological guidelines were derived from developed countries, and these are now in the melting-pot.

Some key questions raised by a brief assessment of existing IUCN ecological guidelines for tropical rural development will be presented for detailed discussion, to assist decisions about future priorities and directions for ecological research in the new area.