Environmental resource management
Environmental resource management is an issue of increasing concern, as reflected in its prevalence in several texts influencing global sociopolitical frameworks such as the Brundtland Commission's Our Common Future,[3] which highlighted the integrated nature of the environment and international development, and the Worldwatch Institute's annual State of the World reports.
The environment determines the nature of people, animals, plants, and places around the Earth, affecting behaviour, religion, culture and economic practices.
[6] These styles perceive "...different evidence, imperatives, and problems, and prescribe different solutions, strategies, technologies, roles for economic sectors, culture, governments, and ethics, etc.
"[7] Anthropocentrism, "an inclination to evaluate reality exclusively in terms of human values,"[8] is an ethic reflected in the major interpretations of Western religions and the dominant economic paradigms of the industrialised world.
[12] At an extreme of the ethical scale, ecocentrism includes philosophies such as ecofeminism and deep ecology, which evolved as a reaction to dominant anthropocentric paradigms.
[6] "In its current form, it is an attempt to synthesize many old and some new philosophical attitudes about the relationship between nature and human activity, with particular emphasis on ethical, social, and spiritual aspects that have been downplayed in the dominant economic worldview.
"[18] "The pairing of significant uncertainty about the behaviour and response of ecological systems with urgent calls for near-term action constitutes a difficult reality, and a common lament" for many environmental resource managers.
However, "it is argued that Western scientific knowledge ... is often insufficient to deal with the full complexity of the interplay of variables in environmental resource management.
[35][36] In context, sustainability implies that rather than competing for endless growth on a finite planet, development improves quality of life without necessarily consuming more resources.
Today's economic paradigms do not protect the natural environment, yet they deepen human dependency on biodiversity and ecosystem services.
[36][43] Socially, an increasing gap between rich and poor and the global North–South divide denies many access to basic human needs, rights, and education, leading to further environmental destruction.
[35][36] To achieve sustainable development with environmental resource management an organisation should work within sustainability principles, including social and environmental accountability, long-term planning; a strong, shared vision; a holistic focus; devolved and consensus decision making; broad stakeholder engagement and justice; transparency measures; trust; and flexibility.
[35][36][46] To adjust to today's environment of quick social and ecological changes, some organizations have begun to experiment with new tools and concepts.
[48][49] Some of the world's largest and most profitable corporations are shifting to sustainable environmental resource management: Ford, Toyota, BMW, Honda, Shell, Du Port, Sta toil,[50] Swiss Re, Hewlett-Packard, and Unilever, among others.
[54] Such private sector recovery groups include mining (minerals and petroleum), forestry and fishery organisations.
[47] The aim of civil society in environmental resource management is to be included in the decision-making process by means of public participation.
[47] Public participation can be an effective strategy to invoke a sense of social responsibility of natural resources.
There are villages within this savanna surrounded by “islands” of forests, allowing for forts, hiding, rituals, protection from wind and fire, and shade for crops.
This led to colonial Guinea’s implementation of policies, including the switch of upland to swamp farming; bush-fire control; protection of certain species and land; and tree planting in villages.
During the 1780s to 1860s “the whole country [was] prairie.” James Fairhead and Melissa Leach, both environmental anthropologists at the University of Sussex, claim the state’s environmental analyses “casts into question the relationships between society, demography, and environment.” With this, they reformed the state’s narratives: Local land use can be both vegetation enriching and degrading; combined effect on resource management is greater than the sum of their parts; there is evidence of increased population correlating to an increase in forest cover.
Fairhead and Leach support the enabling of policy and socioeconomic conditions in which local resource management conglomerates can act effectively.
