This will be an overall reflection of the program that I’m writing after getting back to Indiana. The main focus will be on my views of conservation after this experience and what I’m taking away from the program.
The takeaway that has stuck with me the most from this program is realizing what lens the field of environmental science is taught through, at least in my experiences in this major. Throughout my courses at Indiana University, and even in my environmental science class in high school, I’ve always noticed a shift in responsibility toward the countries that me and other students of color identify with, which are also usually the countries that have contributed the least to causing climate change. At times, these even manifest as attacks on those countries or the people of the Global South, like what we read about India and China in 6 Degrees: “few people in today’s India give much of a damn about global warming” (Lynas, 2007). For most of my time in college, I haven’t really challenged some of these attacks or the dismissal of the Global South, even though I identify as a person of color and I find them uncomfortable. And it’s not just me: when talking to other students of color, we usually have had these same concerns throughout college. It’s also telling when almost all of the few students of color in this program came to the same conclusion that the reading of 6 Degrees was racist. These experiences, whether it’s frustration with openly racist readings or disappointment when the damages that are done by climate change to the countries that we or our families are from aren’t acknowledged, are shared between us. However, what’s just as disheartening is when we start to challenge these systems but any signs of change are hard to see. When a lot of the material that we’re provided with in these classes continue to exclude sensitivity to marginalized communities, it’s clear to see that conservation, at least in the United States, doesn’t seem to be open to these communities unless if we’re alright with pushing through material that is insensitive to our communities; if we do push back, it’s rare that we see any changes to the system that we’re challenging.
Expanding beyond the United States, we saw a similar issue in Costa Rica. A lot of the places that we stayed at were foreign-owned bubbles where researchers, a lot of the time from the Global North, could study an ecosystem that they’ve never been able to before. Staying at these locations felt isolating from the rest of the country, especially Costa Rican communities and cities. It was surprising to see the exclusion of or lack of accessibility to these sites for Costa Ricans while in Costa Rica; instead, it seemed to mostly be filled with foreign researchers, a lot of whom seemed to be from the Global North. It’s hard to see conservation , as it is currently practiced, as an inclusive field that actually works to equitably mitigate the effects of climate change.
The positives that I’ll take away from this program were from the conversations with everyone else in the class. The first thing was that a lot of the other students were interested in pushing for changes at Indiana University and in the United States after the program; for example, there was interest in joining the current movement to get a commitment to carbon neutrality from Indiana University. This was especially hopeful given the United States’ disproportionate contributions to the causes of the climate crisis. I also got connected with ways to support the Bloomington community in multiple ways, such as cooking food for the unhoused community in Bloomington. When helping out with these organizations, we’ll also have a stronger sense of community since many of us from this program are closer with each other now and will be participating together. Staying connected with other students from this class will be the most fulfilling outcome of this program.
Work Cited
Lynas, Mark. Six Degrees: Our Future on a Hotter Planet. Fourth Estate, 2007.
Leave a Reply