A typology of scientific bottlenecks to natural resources development
A preliminary systematic framework for considering the scientific bottlenecks to the development of natural resources is presented, as a basis for discussion and refinement. In giving particular attention to problems of resource use in developing countries, two main types of scientific bottlenecks are recognized. One concerns the quality and quantity of information on natural resources, and the use that is made of that information. The second relates to the quality and quantity of local manpower in the ecological and related sciences that is available to developing countries, and to the conditions that affect the promotion and stability of scientific endeavor in these countries.Action strategies for combatting these bottlenecks are proposed. These strategies emphasize the need to improve the scientific basis for the predictable use of natural resources, to facilitate multi-directional links of scientific cooperation between countries, and to help develop national self-reliance in research and management activities. They stress such principles of action as the promotion of a problem-oriented, interdisciplinary approach within specific geographic units, and the combination of research, training and demonstration within particular field activities. These features of suggested research run counter neither to scientific method nor to the freedom of scientific endeavor. They do, however, entail a change in the way that much research is conceived and organized. More particularly, they entail the incorporation of additional dimensions in the overall research effort, including that of a perception approach to problems.
Enhancing the credibility of ecology: Is interdisciplinary research for land use planning useful?
Interdisciplinary approaches involving inputs from both the natural and social sciences represent one operational and social response to the complexity of today's environmental and land use problems. The resulting amalgam can be useful to both science and society, given the right mix of ingredients. Important steps in the planning and conduct of interdisciplinary research include problem indentification; definition of a precise scientific theme derived from the social demand; choice of relevant disciplines; selection of study area and spatial scale; ensuring that the project is adaptable to changing circumstances; obtaining the involvement of scientists, planners and local people; developing a continuum of actions from basic and applied research through to training and information diffusion; early and explicit definition of the criteria for evaluation. Though interdisciplinary approaches have shown their worth, they founder easily. Obstacles include the behavioural and psychological characteristics of individual scientists, differences in scientific method, and bottlenecks of a more administrative, institutional, political and financial nature.
The New ‘U’
Today's talk about tenure must be framed within broader discussions about the role of the university. Our university system is now over one hundred years old, the “Old-Time College” is gone, the “cold war” university is no longer viable, and the foundations of the modern “multiversity” are cracking, so it is time to talk about change. But change is not necessarily reform, and resisting change probably will not keep things the way they are, so academics must understand the forces reshaping the university. Whenever I listen to colleagues defend the status quo by saying that the United States has a university system that is the envy of the world, I hear echoes of the Detroit automobile industry's casual dismissal of foreign competitors in the early 1960s. The decision not to change did not preserve the auto industry, and it is unlikely to preserve public universities as we know them. The current debates about tenure began with ideological attacks on “tenured radicals” who used their secure jobs to subvert conservative cultural values. The attack on tenure gathered steam as fiscal hawks in financially-strapped states looked for ways to save money and found huge state university systems with budgets to match. When asked why he robbed banks, the legendary Willie Sutton replied, “Because that's where the money is.” When asked why they are robbing tenure, legislators, regents, and administrators reply, “Because that's where the money is.” Personnel costs are a large share of university budgets and tenure ties the hands of administrators and legislators accustomed to using purse strings to control universities.