In other words, can someone who is unable to have an embodied experience in remote wild geographies form ample pictures about them in his/her academic papers and thesis? Or, is traveling to those places a must?
You don't need to have experienced things to have an informed opinion about them through reading. So yes, you can write about anything you like. Einstein wrote about relativity, but never experienced it for himself, so :)
Yes, I think so, perhaps he gained knowledge by reading and reading extensively about the subject
Yes, of course!
We need someone with such thoughts to bridge the scientific world and society. These people are often called scientific communicators.
Read more, enrich yourself with related knowledge, and shared with the community.
Feel free to share with me your work if you write in the future!
All the best!
@Ilan Kelman: A very inspiring article indeed. Although it has tackled the participatory dimension of research (unlike my question relative to the researcher's being onsite to study the natural setting either using mostly a philosophical or literary perspective), it does include important keywords such as immersive experience and environmental change. Your conclusion is very helpful: doing remote research should avoid major disadvantages of not being onsite. This was what I described in my article on doctoral supervision during the confinement period (included in my RG repertoire). Thanks.
@Kok Sim Chan: certainly! Just click the follow button to get my future scientific update. Thankfully
There are onion layers about ecological knowledge, that can be used for conservation:
1.) Want to conserve for the sake of conservation, anyone can have that desire without ever visiting an area--you want to conserve something just because it exists.
2.) Are aware of the importance of conserving an area, for a particular reason you know about, such as for a particular forest type, this is the last stand of virgin forest for example. On top of having a desire for an ecosystem, there is something special about a particular location.
3.) You have a local list of rare and endangered species, so use that to set aside areas where those plants or animals exist.
4.) You have worked in an ecosystem to restore it, and was able to restore an area from scratch, like a native grassland and wildflower field, so you know what are the key components. So when you see them in another area, you know what parts are most important to conserve for the future, so you have the correct local genetic material to work with in the future. Picture of my project at Kite Hill, in Woodside, California.
5.) You want to help conserve half of the planet for the wild, just like what E.O. Wilson has been suggesting--half for human use and the other half for the wild things where they can live undisturbed.
@Craig Carlton Dremann: Very important conservation tips. Indeed, my question was about doing theoretical research about, for example, the conservation of the Amazon forests while never being there.
I would add Item 6.) Being aware that our lives, our agriculture and grazing lands depend on natural ecosystems staying intact, or we will need to flee. On this planet everywhere we live, our agriculture, grazing lands and timber harvesting is all dependent on a ratio between the lands we utilize and the natural ecosystems around us, usually at a ratio of 4:1. For example, California's 39 million people and its agriculture is dependent on the Coast Range and Sierra forests to bring the snow and rainfall we need to survive for the summer. Same for Morocco, without the natural forests, the Sahara would move all the way to the edge of the Mediterranean and everyone would need to leave. That is why they are planting the Great Green Wall, along the edge of the Sahel right now, to increase that ratio.
@Craig Carlton Dremann: Don't you think that despite the great green belt, the Sahara would move on because the spatial scale of desertification is larger and more complex than a phenomenon on the surface of the planet?
This question has two contexts.
The first context: this is a bottom-up movement. When the purpose of the study lies within the boundaries of wild geographies. In this case, the researcher has the right to rephrase this question into an obvious answer: if you want to write an article or dissertation about the nature of wild geographies, then first dive "headfirst" into this nature and get all the data from wild geographies itself.
The second context: this is a top-down movement. When the purpose of the study does not lie within the boundaries of wild geographies. In this case, the researcher does not have to dive into wild geographies. It is possible to formulate a complete picture of wild geographies from understanding the role of this wild geographies in the structure of a certain biogeocenosis. The existing knowledge about wild geographies will only serve as a confirmation of this idea.
@Vladimir Mokiy: new avenues of thoughts for which I am so thankful. The only thing i haven't grasped yet concerns the top-down movement: how can the purpose of the study not be about wild geographies and still formulate a complete picture of wild geographies? Do you mean, it is the case when wild geographies is of a secondary rather than a primary concern?
This question has two contexts.
The first context: the recognition of priority and secondary importance. When a researcher attaches primary importance to wild geographies and secondary importance to the entire biogeocenosis to which wild geographies belongs, he does not pay attention to the influence of biogeocenosis on the quantitative and qualitative parameters and characteristics of endemics. In this case, the researcher will describe wild geographies as it is.
The second context: the exclusion of priority and secondary importance. When the researcher initially bases the study of wild geographies on the principle of mutual influence of biogeocenosis and wild geographies. In this case, the researcher must determine the physical boundaries of the biogeocenosis territory; determine the physical boundaries of the main fragments of this territory; determine the zones in these main fragments in which the influence of other fragments will be minimal (control zones); determine the hybridization zones (zones of partial overlap of the main fragments of biogeocenosis); to identify the number of endemics, as well as the values of their quantitative and qualitative parameters and characteristics in control zones and hybridization zones; to summarize the data obtained. Only after such a general step organization, wild geographies research can be considered as scientifically sound and practically useful as possible.
Thanks. After such an assessment of the answers, methodological tools should be shared.
Mokiy, V.S. (2020). Information on the Space Systems Transdisciplinary Aspect. European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 16(29), 26. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2020.v16n29p26 https://eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/view/13507
Mokiy V.S. (2021). Information on the information. Systems transdisciplinary aspect // Universum: общественные науки : электрон. научн. журн. 2021. 1-2(71). https://doi.org/10.32743/UniSoc.2021.71.1-2.40-48
@Vladimir Mokiy: As the proverb says: the miracle is this: "the more you share, the more you have." (My hat off to you).
Travelling is a part of education is an old proverb; the more you visit the field the more you get ground zero real time data
The connectivity with the ground reality helps in elaboarating ir more authentically on paper.