Augusto González has joined CSTPR through December 2016 while he is on an EU Fellowship from the European Commission in Brussels. Below is a portion of a blog post from Augusto’s Exploring Space Commercialisation in Colorado Blog.

Congressman Ed Perlmutter (Colorado) is a staunch advocate of space development and, notably, space exploration. He is a vocal proponent of Mars exploration and is leading a quest for human travel to Mars to take place in 2033 – a year in which planetary alignment would make the trip significantly shorter.

Congressman Perlmutter has a long record of fighting for the space sector and space programmes. When the Constellation programme was shelved, he spearheaded efforts to ensure the survival of Orion Multi-purpose Crew Vehicle, whose prime contractor is Lockheed Martin, a company with a strong presence in Colorado. He has also been active on regulatory issues, where the main preoccupation is that regulations meet the standards needed to keep up with industry development and that industry has the necessary legal certainty to conduct their businesses.

In Jeff’s opinion “commercial space” is a misnomer. U.S. space manufacturing companies are all commercial. However, most of these companies have traditionally done most of their work under federal government contracts. Therefore, speak of commercial space does not necessarily convey a clear idea of what is it that the expression actually refers to.
Clearly government investment in ISS – be it cargo or crew space transportation – is a powerhouse that enables the space companies growth. In Jeff’s opinion, Space X is no more commercial than Lockheed Martin or Boeing which have been traditional contractors for NASA. If dependence on federal government funding is what defines whether a space activity is commercial, there are companies that may be considered as more truly “commercial” than those mentioned before.

When looking into space activities one has to recognise that there are very different types of industries. Launcher industry is very specific and likely to remain closely connected to Federal government funding. Companies that seek to develop exclusively or primarily commercial business models, i.e. companies whose existence is not determined by or dependent on government funding, are in a different category. These companies are confronted with a different set of issues than those for which government funding is an essential lifeline. It may be necessary to see if there is a need for regulatory adaptations to cater for those differences. Read more …

by Jessica Rich, CIRES/CSTPR Postdoctoral Research Associate

Photo above: Strip mining site in the Ohio Valley, USA. Credit: Jessica Rich.

Over the past five years, I studied the narratives that emerged from conflicts over oil and gas drilling across the Midwestern United States. As a communication researcher, I am interested in how humans give meaning to changing environments but also how environments give meaning to human action. Speaking with residents living atop the Marcellus and Utica shale basins, I learned how place plays an active role in their lives at work and at home. While visiting a small Ohio Valley town, once known for its coal mines, I met a retired couple who grew up, settled down, and made their livelihood within a few square miles of their current home. As the region’s policymakers discovered the lucrative potential of unconventional drilling in the last decade, local communities saw their environment change dramatically but had little to no say in the environmental decision-making process. I toured the area with the couple I met, as they pointed out the drill sites, which had been built on top of old mining sites, which had been dug into a once agricultural landscape. The environment, whether mined, drilled, or farmed, actively participated in the couple’s narrative and their identity. Personal stories of the changing landscapes uncovered relations between community, the natural environment, and between individual and industrial histories.

Since arriving as a CIRES/CSTPR postdoctoral researcher in September and participating in ongoing conversations about environmental and climate policy, questions have begun to emerge for me about how nature is defined in policy and the narratives that these policies make possible. What meanings are given to human-nature relations in the policies that govern environmental decision-making? What assumptions underlie the socio-ecological relations that policy legitimizes? Too often, environmental policy is anthropocentric, sliding between conceptualizations of nature as a resource from which to profit and nature as an entity to be preserved for human enjoyment. Rarely, do policies encourage the right of nature to exist beyond its economic utility, bringing about consequences that are local and global.

As I begin my research of drilling discourses in the West, I am learning of the actions taken by some Coloradoans to fight for local control over oil and gas siting and development. The Colorado Community Rights Network’s efforts, in particular, highlight how human-nature relations intersect in the struggle for local self-government. In their official declaration, the CCRN “[joins] together with other statewide movements to amend the federal Constitution to elevate the rights of people and communities above the claimed rights of corporations, create legal rights for natural ecosystems, eliminate the commerce clause, and other impediments to local community self-governance.” Taking cue from the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund and the UN Rights of Nature Law and Policy, not to mention a history of indigenous knowledge and action, CCRN’s proposal moves conceptualizations of human-nature relations from one based in ownership toward “recognizing that ecosystems and natural communities are not merely property that can be owned, but are entities that have an independent right to exist and flourish” and an awareness of the “inherent rights of Nature to exist, thrive and evolve.” While CCRN’s recent efforts to include their proposed measures in the November ballot were stalled, local proposals have been enacted elsewhere in the U.S. in response to unconventional drilling. The city of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania passed a similar local self-government ordinance in 2010 in response to the growth of drilling in the Marcellus.

Communicating policy is a political act, and the meanings given to nature constitute the possibilities for its governance and have the power to reimagine cooperative narratives between humans and non-human nature. How nature is defined in policy, as seen with CCRN’s recent proposals, can encourage communities to reflect not only on nature’s meaning but also a shared purpose and fate. As I develop my post-doctoral research over the next two years, I look forward to connecting with researchers and local communities to develop more just ecological and political futures through policy and action.

by Lee Frankel-Goldwater

On September 26th, I had the fortunate opportunity to attend and present at the Best of Both World’s Conference on Environmental Education and Education for Sustainable development at YMCA in Estes Park just outside of Boulder. Driving into the parking lot in front of the log cabin conference hall, I found myself surrounded by mountains and embraced by the crisp clean air Colorado is so famous for. It was the perfect setting for an environmental educator’s research and practice gathering. Hope, passion and action are a hallmark of this community – an understanding drawing from a belief that social action, environmental protection, and humanistic integrity must intertwine to bring about transitions to sustainability. Moreover, this is a group of risk takers, as many outside the fold of environmental and educational program development perceive this work to be rose colored, and perhaps unworthy for inclusion in the agenda of large-scale initiatives for socio-environmental change. If this conference demonstrated any one point, it is that environmental and sustainability education have wide reaching implications for bringing about transitions towards worldwide understanding and community-based initiatives for empowerment and environmental justice.

Several workshops and sessions I attended exemplified this in particular and I encourage researchers and practitioners alike to explore these contributions for their own programs:

Citizen Science on the GO: New Mobile Tools for Environmental Education, Monitoring, and Research [Russanne Low, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Arlington, VA, U.S.A.] Institute For Global Environmental Strategies

The Visionaria Network: Leadership and Empowerment Training [Kali Basman, The Visionaria Network, Los Angeles, CA, U.S.A.] Visionaria Network

ACEER’s Environmental Education Programs in Peru: Developing Citizens and Leaders in the Heart of the Amazon [Paul Morgan, West Chester University, West Chester, PA, U.S.A.] ACEER – Amazon Center for Environmental Education and Research

My own presentation was on an authentic learning model I developed and tested for teaching whole systems thinking and environmental citizenship in an undergraduate classroom setting: Social Responsibility and the World of Nature – BoBW Conference Presentation by Lee Frankel-Goldwater. The effort was well received, though I humbly recognize that many researchers and practitioners are creating impacts far more significant than my own. Overall, it was the conference trends that were so fascinating for me. I share a few of these here to spark conversation, and would be glad to connect with readers interested in learning more about any of these items so we can continue to grow and learn together:

1. Applications of digital technologies and communication tools are a major trend in environmental and sustainability education, and many researchers and practitioners are exploring expanded use for broader, leaner, and global impacts towards socio-ecological change.
2. Environmental and sustainability education programs are an international phenomenon, though often localized, and networking these programs into global initiatives maybe a step to improving global environmental citizenship and scaling worldwide impacts.
3. Community-based action research and citizen science can be vital contributions to knowledge alongside environmental and sustainability education practices. Learning to integrate these methods with wider disciplinary contexts in the natural and social sciences may help to bring about a day when we can achieve the elusive Best of Both Worlds.