1
|
Gregg EA, Kidd LR, Bekessy SA, Martin JK, Robinson JA, Garrard GE. Ethical considerations for conservation messaging research and practice. PEOPLE AND NATURE 2022. [DOI: 10.1002/pan3.10373] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Emily A. Gregg
- ICON Science, School of Global, Urban, and Social Studies RMIT University Melbourne Victoria Australia
| | - Lindall R. Kidd
- ICON Science, School of Global, Urban, and Social Studies RMIT University Melbourne Victoria Australia
| | - Sarah A. Bekessy
- ICON Science, School of Global, Urban, and Social Studies RMIT University Melbourne Victoria Australia
| | - Jen K. Martin
- School of BioSciences The University of Melbourne Melbourne Victoria Australia
| | | | - Georgia E. Garrard
- ICON Science, School of Global, Urban, and Social Studies RMIT University Melbourne Victoria Australia
- School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences The University of Melbourne Melbourne Victoria Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Crooks KR, Gonzalez MN, Ghasemi B. Scientist perspectives toward the status and management of gray wolves in the western United States. CONSERVATION SCIENCE AND PRACTICE 2022. [DOI: 10.1111/csp2.12728] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin R. Crooks
- Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology Colorado State University Fort Collins Colorado USA
| | - Mireille N. Gonzalez
- Department of Human Dimensions of Natural Resources Colorado State University Fort Collins Colorado USA
| | - Benjamin Ghasemi
- Department of Human Dimensions of Natural Resources Colorado State University Fort Collins Colorado USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hessburg PF, Prichard SJ, Hagmann RK, Povak NA, Lake FK. Wildfire and climate change adaptation of western North American forests: a case for intentional management. ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS : A PUBLICATION OF THE ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA 2021; 31:e02432. [PMID: 34339086 PMCID: PMC9285088 DOI: 10.1002/eap.2432] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2020] [Revised: 02/17/2021] [Accepted: 03/03/2021] [Indexed: 05/05/2023]
Abstract
Forest landscapes across western North America (wNA) have experienced extensive changes over the last two centuries, while climatic warming has become a global reality over the last four decades. Resulting interactions between historical increases in forested area and density and recent rapid warming, increasing insect mortality, and wildfire burned areas, are now leading to substantial abrupt landscape alterations. These outcomes are forcing forest planners and managers to identify strategies that can modify future outcomes that are ecologically and/or socially undesirable. Past forest management, including widespread harvest of fire- and climate-tolerant large old trees and old forests, fire exclusion (both Indigenous and lightning ignitions), and highly effective wildfire suppression have contributed to the current state of wNA forests. These practices were successful at meeting short-term demands, but they match poorly to modern realities. Hagmann et al. review a century of observations and multi-scale, multi-proxy, research evidence that details widespread changes in forested landscapes and wildfire regimes since the influx of European colonists. Over the preceding 10 millennia, large areas of wNA were already settled and proactively managed with intentional burning by Indigenous tribes. Prichard et al. then review the research on management practices historically applied by Indigenous tribes and currently applied by some managers to intentionally manage forests for resilient conditions. They address 10 questions surrounding the application and relevance of these management practices. Here, we highlight the main findings of both papers and offer recommendations for management. We discuss progress paralysis that often occurs with strict adherence to the precautionary principle; offer insights for dealing with the common problem of irreducible uncertainty and suggestions for reframing management and policy direction; and identify key knowledge gaps and research needs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul F. Hessburg
- USDA‐FS, Pacific Northwest Research Station1133 N. Western AvenueWenatcheeWashington98801USA
- College of the Environment‐SEFSUniversity of WashingtonSeattleWashington98195USA
| | - Susan J. Prichard
- College of the Environment‐SEFSUniversity of WashingtonSeattleWashington98195USA
| | - R. Keala Hagmann
- College of the Environment‐SEFSUniversity of WashingtonSeattleWashington98195USA
- Applegate Forestry LLCCorvallisOregon97330USA
| | - Nicholas A. Povak
- USDA‐FS, Pacific Northwest Research Station1133 N. Western AvenueWenatcheeWashington98801USA
- USDA‐FS, Pacific Southwest Research Station2480 Carson RoadPlacervilleCalifornia95667USA
| | - Frank K. Lake
- USDA‐FS, Pacific Southwest Research Station1700 Bayview DriveArcataCalifornia95521USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rossa-Roccor V, Giang A, Kershaw P. Framing climate change as a human health issue: enough to tip the scale in climate policy? Lancet Planet Health 2021; 5:e553-e559. [PMID: 34390673 DOI: 10.1016/s2542-5196(21)00113-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2020] [Revised: 04/03/2021] [Accepted: 04/16/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
Almost four decades of climate science have not yet led to transformative policy change at the pace and scale required to confront the climate crisis. Colleagues in the planetary health community attribute much potential to framing climate change as human health issue in order to create greater impact on policy makers. In this Personal View, we discuss the promise and limitations of this approach by drawing on insights from political science and public policy with regards to the complexity of these contentious policy issues. We argue that we, as academics, have a moral obligation to embrace an active role in the knowledge-to-action (KTA) sphere and that we would be well advised to expand our KTA approach to include evidence-based strategies, such as lobbying or civil resistance. As scientists, we can no longer wait to embrace the realpolitik insights of political science to move our evidence into policy action.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Verena Rossa-Roccor
- Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
| | - Amanda Giang
- Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Paul Kershaw
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada; Generation Squeeze, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Treves A, Paquet PC, Artelle KA, Cornman AM, Krofel M, Darimont CT. Transparency About Values and Assertions of Fact in Natural Resource Management. FRONTIERS IN CONSERVATION SCIENCE 2021. [DOI: 10.3389/fcosc.2021.631998] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Worldwide, unsustainable use of nature threatens many ecosystems and the services they provide for a broad diversity of life, including humans. Yet, governments commonly claim that the best available science supports their policies governing extraction of natural resources. We confront this apparent paradox by assessing the complexity of the intersections among value judgments, fact claims, and scientifically verified facts. Science can only describe how nature works and predict the likely outcomes of our actions, whereas values influence which actions or objectives society ought to pursue. In the context of natural resource management, particularly of fisheries and wildlife, governments typically set population targets or use quotas. Although these are fundamentally value judgments about how much of a resource a group of people can extract, quotas are often justified as numerical guidance derived from abstracted, mathematical, or theoretical models of extraction. We confront such justifications by examining failures in transparency about value judgments, which may accompany unsupported assertions articulated as factual claims. We illustrate this with two examples. Our first case concerns protection and human use of habitats harboring the northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), revealing how biologists and policy scholars have argued for divergent roles of scientists within policy debates, and how debates between scientists engaged in policy-relevant research reveal undisclosed value judgments about communication of science beyond its role as a source of description (observation, measurement, analysis, and inference). Our second case concerns protection and use of endangered gray wolves (Canis lupus) and shows how undisclosed value judgments distorted the science behind a government policy. Finally, we draw from the literature of multiple disciplines and wildlife systems to recommend several improvements to the standards of transparency in applied research in natural resource management. These recommendations will help to prevent value-based distortions of science that can result in unsustainable uses and eventual extinctions of populations. We describe methods for communicating about values that avoid commingling factual claims and discuss approaches to communicating science that do not perpetuate the misconception that science alone can dictate policy without consideration of values. Our remedies can improve transparency in both expert and public debate about preserving and using natural resources, and thereby help prevent non-human population declines worldwide.
Collapse
|
6
|
Kusmanoff AM. Message framing in the time of the precautionary principle: response to Martell and Rodewald 2019. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2020; 34:1061-1062. [PMID: 32731304 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13593] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2020] [Accepted: 04/23/2020] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander M Kusmanoff
- ICON Science, School of Global Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University, GPO Box 2476, Melbourne, VIC, 3001, Australia
- National Environment Science Programme, Threatened Species Recovery Hub, Room 532, Goddard Building, University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, 4072, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Abstract
Science is increasingly intertwined with an array of pressing societal issues, from the coronavirus pandemic response, to environmental concerns, to major national security threats. Meanwhile, scientists remain one of the most trusted groups of professionals and are looked to as both sources of inspiration for society’s collective curiosity and effective messengers of useful technical information. While traditional scientific training has not emphasized the skills needed to coherently translate nuanced scientific research to audiences beyond one’s inner academic circle, today’s scientists (and, prominently, scientists-in-training) are increasingly seeking out ways to engage with such broader audiences and apply their skills to real-world problems. Here, we offer engagement strategies for scientists across levels of scale (e.g., at the individual, lab group, department/university, and cross-institutional levels), highlighting both existing opportunities and areas where improved capacity for science engagement is warranted. We argue that efforts to enhance and harmonize engagement efforts will have multi-faceted benefits, with greater opportunities for science-society dialogues, enhanced equity and inclusivity in such dialogues, and broader professional opportunities for early career scientists. While we acknowledge that the development of effective scientific engagement skills requires interest, effort, time and resources, we argue that the development of skills for effective public engagement is a worthwhile and necessary element of scientific training that enables unique, rewarding, and multifaceted professional opportunities.
Collapse
|
8
|
Driscoll DA, Garrard GE, Kusmanoff AM, Dovers S, Maron M, Preece N, Pressey RL, Ritchie EG. Consequences of information suppression in ecological and conservation sciences. Conserv Lett 2020. [DOI: 10.1111/conl.12757] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Don A. Driscoll
- Academic Freedom Working Group Ecological Society of Australia Windsor Australia
- Centre for Integrative Ecology School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University Geelong Melbourne Burwood Campus Burwood Australia
| | - Georgia E. Garrard
- Academic Freedom Working Group Ecological Society of Australia Windsor Australia
- ICON Science, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies RMIT University Melbourne Australia
| | - Alexander M. Kusmanoff
- Academic Freedom Working Group Ecological Society of Australia Windsor Australia
- ICON Science, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies RMIT University Melbourne Australia
| | - Stephen Dovers
- Academic Freedom Working Group Ecological Society of Australia Windsor Australia
- Fenner School of Environment and Society Australian National University Canberra Australia
| | - Martine Maron
- Academic Freedom Working Group Ecological Society of Australia Windsor Australia
- School of Earth and Environmental Sciences The University of Queensland Brisbane Australia
| | - Noel Preece
- Academic Freedom Working Group Ecological Society of Australia Windsor Australia
- College of Science & Engineering, Centre for Tropical Environmental and Sustainability Science James Cook University Cairns Australia
- Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods Charles Darwin University Darwin Australia
| | - Robert L. Pressey
- Academic Freedom Working Group Ecological Society of Australia Windsor Australia
- Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies James Cook University Townsville Australia
| | - Euan G. Ritchie
- Academic Freedom Working Group Ecological Society of Australia Windsor Australia
- Centre for Integrative Ecology School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University Geelong Melbourne Burwood Campus Burwood Australia
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
From a variety of ethics to the integrity and congruence of research on biodiversity conservation. Asian Bioeth Rev 2018; 10:313-332. [PMID: 33717295 DOI: 10.1007/s41649-018-0072-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2018] [Revised: 11/17/2018] [Accepted: 12/11/2018] [Indexed: 10/26/2022] Open
Abstract
This article aims to find the elements that are required for a common ethical approach that is suitable for the different perspectives adopted in integrative biodiversity conservation research. A general reflection on the integrity of research is a priority worldwide, with a common aim to promote good research practice. Beyond the relationship between researcher and research subject, the integrity of research is considered in a broader perspective which entails scientific integrity towards society. In research involving a variety of disciplines and a diversity of legal and ethical frameworks, there is a need of harmony between different sets of values. The notion of congruence (or more pragmatically, alignment) reflects the consistency of ethics in research within the biodiversity conservation's community of researchers. It also bears on the coherence of values shared between the scientific community and society. We examine the notion of research integrity in a broad sense. This examination is to be conducted in relation to the goal of protecting ecological integrity, which is at the core of biodiversity conservation. The notion of integrity constraints should be investigated further to develop a pragmatic response to the need for integrity and congruence in research for biodiversity conservation.
Collapse
|
10
|
Reed SE, Thomas SL, Bednarek AT, DellaSala DA, Evans MC, Lundquist C, Mascia MB, McPherson TY, Watson JEM. Roles for scientific societies to engage with conservation policy. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2018; 32:513-515. [PMID: 29508927 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13092] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah E Reed
- Americas Program, Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, NY 10460, USA
- Department of Fish, Wildlife and Conservation Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1474, USA
| | - Sarah L Thomas
- Sarah Thomas Consulting, LLC, 8400 East Prentice Avenue #1500, Greenwood Village, CO 80111, USA
| | - Angela T Bednarek
- Environmental Science Division, The Pew Charitable Trusts, 901 E Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20004, USA
| | | | - Megan C Evans
- School for Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia
| | - Carolyn Lundquist
- National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, P.O. Box 11115, Hamilton 3251, New Zealand
- Institute of Marine Science, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand
| | - Michael B Mascia
- Betty and Gordon Moore Center for Science, Conservation International, 2011 Crystal Drive, Suite 500, Arlington, VA 22202, USA
| | - Tsitsi Y McPherson
- Biology Department, State University of New York College at Oneonta, Oneonta, NY 13820, USA
| | - James E M Watson
- School for Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia
- Global Conservation Program, Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, NY 10460, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Crouzat E, Arpin I, Brunet L, Colloff MJ, Turkelboom F, Lavorel S. Researchers must be aware of their roles at the interface of ecosystem services science and policy. AMBIO 2018; 47:97-105. [PMID: 28913614 PMCID: PMC5709268 DOI: 10.1007/s13280-017-0939-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2017] [Revised: 07/20/2017] [Accepted: 08/11/2017] [Indexed: 05/04/2023]
Abstract
Scientists working on ecosystem service (ES) science are engaged in a mission-driven discipline. They can contribute to science-policy interfaces where knowledge is co-produced and used. How scientists engage with the governance arena to mobilise their knowledge remains a matter of personal choice, influenced by individual values. ES science cannot be considered neutral and a discussion of the values that shape it forms an important part of the sustainability dialogue. We propose a simple decision tree to help ES scientists identify their role and the purpose of the knowledge they produce. We characterise six idealised scientific postures spanning possible roles at the science-policy interface (pure scientist, science arbiter-guarantor, issue advocate-guardian, officer, honest broker and stealth issue advocate) and illustrate them with feedbacks from interviews. We encourage ES scientists to conduct a reflexive exploration of their attitudes regarding knowledge production and use, with the intention of progressing toward a higher recognition of the political and ethical importance of ES assessments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emilie Crouzat
- Laboratoire d’Ecologie Alpine (LECA), UMR 5553, CNRS, Université Grenoble Alpes, BP 53, 2233 rue de la Piscine, 38041 Grenoble Cedex 9, France
| | | | - Lucas Brunet
- Université Grenoble Alpes, Irstea, Grenoble, France
| | - Matthew J. Colloff
- Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
| | - Francis Turkelboom
- Research Group Nature & Society, Research Institute for Nature and Forest (INBO), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Sandra Lavorel
- Laboratoire d’Ecologie Alpine (LECA), UMR 5553, CNRS, Université Grenoble Alpes, BP 53, 2233 rue de la Piscine, 38041 Grenoble Cedex 9, France
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Carroll C, Hartl B, Goldman GT, Rohlf DJ, Treves A, Kerr JT, Ritchie EG, Kingsford RT, Gibbs KE, Maron M, Watson JEM. Defending the scientific integrity of conservation-policy processes. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2017; 31:967-975. [PMID: 28741747 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12958] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2016] [Revised: 05/16/2017] [Accepted: 05/19/2017] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
Government agencies faced with politically controversial decisions often discount or ignore scientific information, whether from agency staff or nongovernmental scientists. Recent developments in scientific integrity (the ability to perform, use, communicate, and publish science free from censorship or political interference) in Canada, Australia, and the United States demonstrate a similar trajectory. A perceived increase in scientific-integrity abuses provokes concerted pressure by the scientific community, leading to efforts to improve scientific-integrity protections under a new administration. However, protections are often inconsistently applied and are at risk of reversal under administrations publicly hostile to evidence-based policy. We compared recent challenges to scientific integrity to determine what aspects of scientific input into conservation policy are most at risk of political distortion and what can be done to strengthen safeguards against such abuses. To ensure the integrity of outbound communications from government scientists to the public, we suggest governments strengthen scientific integrity policies, include scientists' right to speak freely in collective-bargaining agreements, guarantee public access to scientific information, and strengthen agency culture supporting scientific integrity. To ensure the transparency and integrity with which information from nongovernmental scientists (e.g., submitted comments or formal policy reviews) informs the policy process, we suggest governments broaden the scope of independent reviews, ensure greater diversity of expert input and transparency regarding conflicts of interest, require a substantive response to input from agencies, and engage proactively with scientific societies. For their part, scientists and scientific societies have a responsibility to engage with the public to affirm that science is a crucial resource for developing evidence-based policy and regulations in the public interest.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlos Carroll
- Klamath Center for Conservation Research, Orleans, CA, 95556, U.S.A
- Society for Conservation Biology North America, Boulder, CO, 80307, U.S.A
| | - Brett Hartl
- Center for Biological Diversity, Washington, D.C., 20005, U.S.A
| | - Gretchen T Goldman
- Union of Concerned Scientists, 1825 K Street NW, Suite 800, Washington, D.C., 20006, U.S.A
| | - Daniel J Rohlf
- Earthrise Law Center, Lewis and Clark Law School, Portland, OR, 97219, U.S.A
| | - Adrian Treves
- Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, 53706, U.S.A
| | - Jeremy T Kerr
- Department of Biology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, K1N6N5, Canada
| | - Euan G Ritchie
- School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Centre for Integrative Ecology, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, 3125, Australia
| | - Richard T Kingsford
- Centre for Ecosystem Science, School of Biological, Earth, and Environmental Sciences, UNSW Australia, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia
| | | | - Martine Maron
- Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia
| | - James E M Watson
- Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Rose DC, Brotherton PNM, Owens S, Pryke T. Honest advocacy for nature: presenting a persuasive narrative for conservation. BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION 2016; 27:1703-1723. [PMID: 31007418 PMCID: PMC6448358 DOI: 10.1007/s10531-016-1163-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2015] [Revised: 06/07/2016] [Accepted: 06/20/2016] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
Conservation scientists are increasingly recognising the value of communicating policy-relevant knowledge to policy-makers. Whilst considerable progress has been made in offering practical advice for scientists seeking to engage more closely with decision-makers, researchers have provided few tangible examples to learn from. This paper uses an English case study, but draws out important high-level messages relevant to conservation scientists worldwide. The case study looks at how the Lawton Review presented knowledge persuasively about the suitability of England's ecological network to deal with future pressures. Through skilful framing of rigorous scientific knowledge it was able to make a significant impact on government policy. Impact was achieved through: (1) selecting politically salient frames through which to communicate; (2) using clear, accessible language, and; (3) conducting rigorous science using an authoritative team of experts. Although its publication coincided with a favourable policy window, the Lawton Review seized on this opportunity to communicate a rigorously argued, persuasive and practical conservation message; in other words, it performed 'honest advocacy'. Thus, whilst it remains important to conduct scientific research with technical rigour, conservation scientists could also benefit from identifying salient frames for conservation and communicating clearly.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David C. Rose
- Present Address: Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Downing Place, Cambridge, CB2 3EN UK
| | | | - Susan Owens
- Present Address: Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Downing Place, Cambridge, CB2 3EN UK
| | - Thomas Pryke
- Present Address: Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Downing Place, Cambridge, CB2 3EN UK
| |
Collapse
|