Compare and contrast

Sure, we live in a globalized world, a global village. Recent events in the financial markets are somewhat painful reminders of that. But that doesn’t mean things are the same everywhere, or even going in the same direction. High(er) altitude farming is alive and well in Nepal, as Jeremy just noted. But on its way to extinction in England. Better irrigation is boosting rice yields in Cambodia. While karez wells are being abandoned in Afghanistan. That’s one reason why I don’t believe the genetic erosion meta-narrative. There is always an exception. And although you can sometimes see the world in a grain of sand, it’s better to look at the beach.

The forest: back to the future

I’ve blogged before about the myth of the pristine forest, at least as it applies to the Amazon, and a long feature in the University of Chicago Magazine entitled Can’t See the Forest for the Trees does a good job of summarizing that argument. But it does a lot more by putting it in a global context. I hadn’t realized that researchers that see the Amazon as a “working landscape” are increasingly finding kindred thinkers in other parts of the world: in the “secret forests” of El Salvador, the greening Sahel, the tea forests of China. There’s a lot of talk nowadays in such circles of the “social life of forests” ((That’s in fact the title of a conference organized in May by the University of Chicago’s Program on the Global Environment.)) and about local communities taking back control, and becoming “gardners of the forests,” in the words of Peter Crane, formerly Director at Kew. Says Chris Reij of the Centre for International Cooperation at the VU University Amsterdam:

“The foresters have the idea that they have to protect trees from farmers. Our own view is that forests have to be protected from foresters.”