Or...
How a new professional paradigm would look alike?
I fully acknowledged the dogma of forestry education, and I embraced it as a practician. Why? I could not argue with the law and technical standards and norms.
"Too much regulation is not enough" is the motto of our forestry policy, which is still promoted under academy umbrella.
The new kids? They are our forgotten social consciousness of the environment. They don't have much in common with the government, or other social institutions, since they actually are NGOs with good communication skills and crowd funding.
I am not sure that properly understood the question, so I follow my agenda. Over-regulation is devastating for forests. Having an investment portfolio with elements you cannot cash or your opportunities are limited is unattractive. You want to rid of those elements. So the result is missing forestry investments, lack of reforestation and afforestation. Nobody grows trees exclusively for others' benefit.
Who should take charge of changing the "command and control" professional forest paradigm?
This is a great phlosophical question. The answer does depend on the ends. But the ends of who? the people or the leaders! the people like the Amoeba moves toward the demands for the survival and growth. Forest is an example and the people should understand and know the values of forests to avoid any wrong selection of the leaders (guard and managers) of the forest. It is completely depends on the education (Morals, Science and Arts)...leaders with no ethics will destroy that paradigm....
All the best
- Badges
- Science topic