As a follow-up to our class discussion this past Wednesday, I thought I’d write a response that detailed what aspects of Miller’s article really resonated with me. The first idea in the text that immediately jumped at me was actually that of Robert Payle’s who stated that “collective ignorance ultimately leads to collective indifference” in regards to conserving biodiversity. It seems as though the disconnect between the general public and the natural world is a reflection of the values and attitudes society possesses; societal emphasis is placed on far more monetary and profitable sectors whereas disciplines like ecology or environmental sciences on biodiversity become trivialized or sidelined. Growing up in cities, Miller remarks, has triggered greater estrangement from wildlife as we are disconnected from nature in both proximity and figuratively. In addition, studying ecology and biodiversity has become stigmatized, as these areas are unconventional and do not conform to the lifestyle and values that accompany urban life. Furthermore, Miller notes that the “shifting baseline syndrome” within “biological impoverishment” exacerbates existing issues. As people in cities grow up less connected to their surroundings and nature, they are less attuned to losses in biodiversity and are vastly unaware of the repercussions that follow. Speaking from personal experience, it was only until I started spending my summer vacations in India (within the village, immersed in the forest basically) that I realized I, too, had fallen victim to this phenomenon. Miller asserts that “expenditures on open spaces and greenways are too often viewed as a luxury” because political agendas are based on pressing financial or social issues, where biodiversity conservation falls through the cleavages. This idea is directly relevant to NYC where so many of our parks are man-made and we must carve out minor, natural landscapes in our city to offset rapid urbanization.
In the article, Miller mentions a few different, albeit general, ways in which the problem with biodiversity loss may be addressed. It seems as though a two-tier approach is required to truly fight the loss of biodiversity in urban environments. Miller remarks that the current ‘educate the public’ model is simply not enough to garner support for conservation, an idea that I wholeheartedly agree with. People, especially adolescents, do need to be made more knowledgeable about biodiversity and urban ecology; however, this schooling must be supplemented or complemented by meaningful interaction with nature. Education may lead to awareness but awareness does not necessarily translate into substantial action. As people grow more estranged from nature and issues with biodiversity conservation become increasingly marginalized, children start to embody the “extinction of experience” model more. From personal experience, I know that whatever I had learned in Environmental Science in 8th grade, I immediately forgot because it didn’t see relevant to me. There has to be a significant connection established between what kids are being taught and the experiences they are having. Often times, children are being educated too far into their youth where there is no time or desire to have valuable experiences with nature. Thus, the elementary school curriculum should revolve more around ecological sciences that could be further enhanced with field trips to zoo’s and “unmanaged lands”. Schools could offer a wider variety of after-school programs that fostered open interaction and encouraged volunteer work that would submerge students into nature. However, approach must be enforced or followed by a stronger political agenda that creates open dialogue about urban ecology; if political leaders and groups were to shift public focus on to conservation efforts, more opportunities could be created. Local political leaders could partner up with ecologists, city-planners, educators, and more to plan opportunities and create experiences for the general population. Inevitably this would trickle down to the public who would be more aware and willing to take action to conserve biodiversity.
