Back to CONSERVATION EDUCATION: COMMON GROUND IN CONSERVATION

Up to Table of Contents

CONSENSUS IN CONSERVATION EDUCATION

At the 1999 SCB meeting a speaker told the story of convening a group of local stakeholders to hold regular discussions on wolf reintroduction in New York's Adirondack Park. Despite the fact that some favored and some opposed reintroduction, and still others would not even attend the meetings, a working group eventually was formed. Dinner became a prelude to each discussion. The decision to invite stakeholders to dinner initially was made to boost attendance, but it turned out to be key to the overall success of the discussions. As people ate, they engaged in non-wolf conversation. They discovered common interests before "taking sides" in the reintroduction debate. When the meetings began the participants largely were unable to attack each other personally. Stakeholder with opposing perspectives were now acquaintances. An vital foundation for constructive discussion had been built.

This story illustrates the importance of consensus decision-making, and one of its building blocks: establishing common ground. Lack of community support almost certainly would have doomed any wolf reintroduction project before it began.

In my work with the Audubon Expedition Institute (AEI) I have ample opportunity to help students become skilled in consensus decision-making. The AEI program is unique in having no fixed campus. We spend 100% of our time as a field-based "learning community." During an AEI semester students and faculty live, work, and study together 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Within that context, common ground is established, and many decisions are made using a version of the consensus decision-making process.

In making day-to-day logistical decisions students learn to avoid the pitfall of making too many decisions by consensus. It becomes apparent that it is impossible to make a full group consensus decision on every starting, meal, and departure time. Instead, many such decisions are delegated to committees or individuals. In this way students develop an understanding of which decisions need full group discussion and which do not.

Curriculum decisions are made using consensus, with faculty setting the parameters. We spend many days visiting practitioners in the field--foresters, loggers, environmental educators, geologists, city planners, and so forth--learning what they do and why they do it. Students have the opportunity to provide input before these visits are arranged. The faculty develop a list of potential experiences (field visits) in a given region and then students choose among the experiences by making consensus decisions. Some experiences also are proposed by students. If their proposals fit our educational goals, a consensus decision on whether to pursue the experience is allowed. In this way faculty ensure that the selected experiences cover the content required in each course, but allow students a significant role in the decision-making process. This approach seems to increase the degree to which students feel invested in each experience.

Students learn the consensus decision-making process by living with it. They understand that a consensus is not a simple majority. Instead it is a decision to which all have agreed even though some of their opinions may have been different. Often, after all opinions have been aired and discussed, a novel resolution emerges. And so we discover another hallmark of decision-making: the final solution may not be one of the ideas originally proposed. Finally, students seem to recognize that because all members of the group are involved, the outcome of a consensus decision is more likely to be supported actively than a plan that was imposed on them.

Consensus is not the fastest way to reach a decision. But it seems to produce durable decisions.

Bruce Lindwall
Audubon Expedition Institute
lindwall@pocketmail.com

Back to CONSERVATION EDUCATION: COMMON GROUND IN CONSERVATION

Up to Table of Contents