Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Failing but Learning: Writing the Wrongs after Redford and Taber

Failing but Learning: Writing the Wrongs after Redford and Taber Nobody enjoys failure, particularly scientists. The competition for funding is fierce and the importance of reputation paramount. Conservation scientists also bear the added burden of knowing that although successes may directly contribute toward stemming the ongoing environmental crisis, failures probably mean fewer resources and even more significantly, less time available for nature conservation. Although failure is usually considered best avoided, Redford and Taber's (2000) insightful paper highlights the vital importance of acknowledging and sharing failures for learning to “do” effective conservation. They call upon conservation organizations to willingly admit and document failures so as to promote the “safe‐fail” culture essential for establishing adaptive resource management systems. Unfortunately, to the best of my knowledge, no conservation organizations have heeded their call. Reading Redford and Taber's (2000) editorial proved a seminal moment in my evolution as a conservation professional. I felt challenged and compelled to heed their call for “writing the wrongs;” my own experience concurred with their wisdom. So, I offer an account of failure in conservation, along with a few hard‐won lessons, in the hope this small contribution triggers the snowballing of a safe‐fail culture within the conservation community. Learning to do conservation better depends on it. Between http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Conservation Biology Wiley

Failing but Learning: Writing the Wrongs after Redford and Taber

KNIGHT, ANDREW T.
Conservation Biology , Volume 20 (4) – Aug 1, 2006
Download PDF
3 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/failing-but-learning-writing-the-wrongs-after-redford-and-taber-L0zHv7A8Kv

References (14)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0888-8892
eISSN
1523-1739
DOI
10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00366.x
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Nobody enjoys failure, particularly scientists. The competition for funding is fierce and the importance of reputation paramount. Conservation scientists also bear the added burden of knowing that although successes may directly contribute toward stemming the ongoing environmental crisis, failures probably mean fewer resources and even more significantly, less time available for nature conservation. Although failure is usually considered best avoided, Redford and Taber's (2000) insightful paper highlights the vital importance of acknowledging and sharing failures for learning to “do” effective conservation. They call upon conservation organizations to willingly admit and document failures so as to promote the “safe‐fail” culture essential for establishing adaptive resource management systems. Unfortunately, to the best of my knowledge, no conservation organizations have heeded their call. Reading Redford and Taber's (2000) editorial proved a seminal moment in my evolution as a conservation professional. I felt challenged and compelled to heed their call for “writing the wrongs;” my own experience concurred with their wisdom. So, I offer an account of failure in conservation, along with a few hard‐won lessons, in the hope this small contribution triggers the snowballing of a safe‐fail culture within the conservation community. Learning to do conservation better depends on it. Between

Journal

Conservation Biology – Wiley

Published: Aug 1, 2006

There are no references for this article.