驯鹿穿越:跨阿拉斯加管道系统、保护和人类世的利益相关者。

IF 0.7 1区 哲学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE British Journal for the History of Science Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI:10.1017/S0007087422000048
Simone Schleper
{"title":"驯鹿穿越:跨阿拉斯加管道系统、保护和人类世的利益相关者。","authors":"Simone Schleper","doi":"10.1017/S0007087422000048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article engages with notions of conservation in the Anthropocene from a history-of-science perspective. It does so by looking at an iconic case of infrastructure development that since the 1970s continues to cause controversies amongst wildlife experts: the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS). I examine how, from the 1970s onwards, the TAPS functioned as an experimental device for ecologists to test the adaptability of migratory caribou to changed environments and their dependency on unaltered ranges. Based on archival research, published reports and interviews, I show that arguments about animal learning, despite assigning a more active role to caribou in the conservation process, did not result in more inclusive forms of development that respected ecological processes and the various stakes of the caribou. In fact, a focus on caribou crossings as an easily observable, yet sole, indicator of the pipeline's impact resulted in a simplified representation of environmental relationships, that was used by the oil industry to argue for additional extraction projects. Arguments based on the material interdependencies of caribou with their environment, though seemingly similar to traditional arguments about range preservation, emerged as part of conservationists' attempts to account for the ecological stakes of caribou, other animals and people.</p>","PeriodicalId":46655,"journal":{"name":"British Journal for the History of Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Caribou crossings: the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System, conservation, and stakeholdership in the Anthropocene.\",\"authors\":\"Simone Schleper\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0007087422000048\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This article engages with notions of conservation in the Anthropocene from a history-of-science perspective. It does so by looking at an iconic case of infrastructure development that since the 1970s continues to cause controversies amongst wildlife experts: the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS). I examine how, from the 1970s onwards, the TAPS functioned as an experimental device for ecologists to test the adaptability of migratory caribou to changed environments and their dependency on unaltered ranges. Based on archival research, published reports and interviews, I show that arguments about animal learning, despite assigning a more active role to caribou in the conservation process, did not result in more inclusive forms of development that respected ecological processes and the various stakes of the caribou. In fact, a focus on caribou crossings as an easily observable, yet sole, indicator of the pipeline's impact resulted in a simplified representation of environmental relationships, that was used by the oil industry to argue for additional extraction projects. Arguments based on the material interdependencies of caribou with their environment, though seemingly similar to traditional arguments about range preservation, emerged as part of conservationists' attempts to account for the ecological stakes of caribou, other animals and people.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46655,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal for the History of Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal for the History of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007087422000048\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal for the History of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007087422000048","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文从科学史的角度探讨了人类世的保护概念。它通过观察一个标志性的基础设施发展案例来证明这一点,这个案例自20世纪70年代以来一直引起野生动物专家的争议:跨阿拉斯加管道系统(TAPS)。我研究了自20世纪70年代以来,TAPS作为生态学家测试迁徙驯鹿对变化环境的适应性及其对未改变范围的依赖的实验装置是如何发挥作用的。基于档案研究、发表的报告和采访,我表明,尽管在保护过程中赋予驯鹿更积极的角色,但关于动物学习的争论并没有导致尊重生态过程和驯鹿各种利益的更具包容性的发展形式。事实上,把驯鹿过境点作为管道影响的一个容易观察的、但唯一的指标,导致了对环境关系的简化表示,这被石油行业用来争论额外的开采项目。基于驯鹿与环境的物质相互依存关系的论点,尽管看起来与传统的范围保护论点相似,但作为自然资源保护主义者试图解释驯鹿、其他动物和人类生态利益的一部分,出现了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Caribou crossings: the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System, conservation, and stakeholdership in the Anthropocene.

This article engages with notions of conservation in the Anthropocene from a history-of-science perspective. It does so by looking at an iconic case of infrastructure development that since the 1970s continues to cause controversies amongst wildlife experts: the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS). I examine how, from the 1970s onwards, the TAPS functioned as an experimental device for ecologists to test the adaptability of migratory caribou to changed environments and their dependency on unaltered ranges. Based on archival research, published reports and interviews, I show that arguments about animal learning, despite assigning a more active role to caribou in the conservation process, did not result in more inclusive forms of development that respected ecological processes and the various stakes of the caribou. In fact, a focus on caribou crossings as an easily observable, yet sole, indicator of the pipeline's impact resulted in a simplified representation of environmental relationships, that was used by the oil industry to argue for additional extraction projects. Arguments based on the material interdependencies of caribou with their environment, though seemingly similar to traditional arguments about range preservation, emerged as part of conservationists' attempts to account for the ecological stakes of caribou, other animals and people.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: This leading international journal publishes scholarly papers and review articles on all aspects of the history of science. History of science is interpreted widely to include medicine, technology and social studies of science. BJHS papers make important and lively contributions to scholarship and the journal has been an essential library resource for more than thirty years. It is also used extensively by historians and scholars in related fields. A substantial book review section is a central feature. There are four issues a year, comprising an annual volume of over 600 pages. Published for the British Society for the History of Science
期刊最新文献
The politics of medical expertise and substance control: WHO consultants for addiction rehabilitation and pharmacy education in Thailand and India during the Cold War. Performing national independence through medical diplomacy: tuberculosis control and socialist internationalism in Cold War Vietnam. Value, knowledge and reputation: zoological exchange by Australian museums, 1870-1900. 'Like nets or cobwebs': Kenelm Digby, Isaac Newton and the problem of rarefaction. Concluding Conversation: De-centring Science Diplomacy - CORRIGENDUM.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1