Faculty of Environmental Studies

The global movement of Indigenous peoples has attracted the attention of a number of scholars, notably lawyers, anthropologists, and cultural theorists (Muehlebach 2003; Anaya 1996; Battiste 2000; Churchill 2003; Dei, Hall, and Rosenberg 2000; Independent Commission 1987; Jull 1999; Kingsbury 1998; Minde 1996; Passy 1999; Pritchard 1998; Radcliffe and Laurie 2001; Feldman 2002; Smith 1999; Ward and Smith 2000; Wilmer 1993). With few exceptions such as Niezen (2000; 2003) and Radha Jappan (1992), this growing interest has not extended to the origins and development of this movement. There are obvious reasons for this: as in other areas of the discipline, historians have seen indigenous movements as matters of national history. However, the growth of “world history” (Hopkins 2002a; Bayly 2004: 432–50) offers a mode of analysis in which varied and related indigenous histories can be considered fruitfully. Moreover, the success of indigenous actors in creating new institutional spaces and a discourse of “indigenous rights” compels historical research into the emergence of the global movement, not least in understanding how very different and dispersed communities have begun to self-identify with the category of indigenous peoples. This is especially so as the movement works toward the declaration of positive international law that can recognize and protect the diversity of first peoples under precisely that banner.

The lack of scholarly analysis of the reconciliation process in Australia remains notable, given that the policy commanded so much public attention and political energy during the 1990s, A frequent lament for reconciliation under the Prime Ministership of John Howard, however, evokes the lack of national political
leadership that has been offered. Andrew Leigh's article 'Leadership and Aboriginal Reconciliation' (AJSI, May 2002), is useful as it brings a concern for rigour to definitions of what leadership might actually mean, while encouraging a renewed
critical engagement with the terms of reconciliation itself. The present paper is an attempt to make that engagement within the terms of political leadership: what sort of leadership is appropriate to the policy of reconciliation?

This research investigates the application of an adaptive ecosystem approach to the problem of the Cooum River and environs in Chennai (formerly Madras), India. The Cooum River is an extremely polluted urban stream that flows into the Bay of Bengal through the heart of Chennai, India’s fourth largest metropolis. During the dry (non-monsoon) season, the upper reaches of the river are dry and flow in the river may be attributed primarily to the production of sewage by the city’s population. The river is essentially a foul-smelling open sewer.

Complexity of the problem is due as much to human factors (population growth, poverty, uncontrolled urban development, jurisdictional conflicts, modes of behaviour of the citizenry, and institutional culture) as to physical characteristics of the system (flat topography, tidal action, blockage of the river mouth by sand bar formation, and monsoon flooding). Uncertainty in the situation is both structural (regarding main processes and activities in the system and the nature of relationships among the various actors and elements), and parametric (having to do with scarcity, poor quality and restricted access to data).

This work has drawn upon methods and techniques of Adaptive Environmental Management and Soft Systems Methodology to operate the ecosystem approach and address the problem. Specifically, this has involved a series of workshops which have brought together planners, researchers, NGOs, and other stakeholders in a participatory process oriented toward problem definition, system identification and conceptualization, determination of objectives for management, and the generation and exploration of management interventions. In addition, a central component of the program has been the development of a loosely-coupled GIS, environmental simulation model, and a decision support module. This is based upon a framework provided by participants in the first workshop in the series, and operationalizes a common understanding of the system.

In addition to generating new insight into the nature of the problem situation, the research has provided a potentially useful tool to planners, managers and researchers in Chennai in the form of a GIS database and decision support system (DSS). Aside from the tool itself , it was found that the process of developing a conceptual model, and attempting to represent this in the DSS has made a significant contribution to understanding of the Cooum system. In particular, this process forced assumptions to be stated explicitly and publically, highlighted areas of uncertainty and led to new understanding in participants’ conception of the problem situation. The program of research also provided a much needed forum for open debate and exchange of information which was removed from the restrictive institutional culture of government departments.

This paper discusses the integration of soft systems methodology (SSM) within an ecosystem approach in research to support rehabilitation and management of the Cooum River and environs in Chennai, India. The Cooum is an extremely polluted urban stream. Its management is complicated by high rates of population growth, poverty, uncontrolled urban development, jurisdictional conflicts, institutional culture, flat topography, tidal action, blockage of the river mouth, and monsoon flooding. The situation is characterized by basic uncertainty about main processes and activities, and the nature of relationships among actors and elements in the system. SSM is an approach for dealing with messy or ill-structured problematic ituations involving human activity. In this work SSM contributed techniques (such as “rich picture” and “CATWOE” tools) to description of the Cooum situation as a socioecological system and informed the approach itself at a theoretical level. Application of three general phases in SSM is discussed in the context of the Cooum River research: (1) problem definition and exploration of the problem situation, (2) development of conceptual models of relevant systems, and (3) the use of these to generate insight and stimulate debate about desirable and feasible change. Its use here gives weight to the statement by others that SSM would be a particularly appropriate methodology to operate the ecosystem approach. As well as informing efforts at management of the Cooum system, this work led the way to explore an adaptive ecosystem approach more broadly to management of the urban environment for human health in Chennai.

This paper examines the prospects for integrating Internet platform GIS or ‘web-GIS’ into environmental justice and related public health research. Specifically, we document the development of a web-GIS created for investigating relationships between health, air quality and socioeconomic factors in Hamilton, Canada. After development of the web-GIS site, we assembled a focus group of public health professionals to test functionality and render opinions about the potential of the site and geographic information in their program implementation. Results show overwhelming support for the further integration of GIS into public health practice. The results also underscore the potential of web-GIS to alleviate concerns of cost and data availability that often limit the use of GIS in community debates centred on environmental justice issues.

The Cooum River is an extremely polluted stream that flows through Chennai, India. Past attempts to rehabilitate the river have focussed on physical interventions such as dredging. However, the problem continues to worsen. This research has borrowed techniques from adaptive management and soft systems methodology to apply an ecosystem approach to the problem. This involved participatory development of conceptual models of relevant systems that informed construction of a GIS-based DSS and environmental model. This paper addresses the link between conceptual models and the DSS. The process of problem identification, system conceptualization, development of the GIS database and DSS, and its use for exploratory scenario analysis was found to stimulate learning about the situation and promoted novel solutions to the problem.

Keywords: Conceptual model; GIS; Decision support system; Soft systems methodology; Adaptive management; Urban environmental management; Environmental model

On December 26, 2004, a tsunami struck coastal areas in the Bay of Bengal. Among the communities affected were Pallavan Nagar and Anju Kudasai slums in Chennai India. These communities have been collaborating, with some success, on a project to manage the urban environment for human health that employs an adaptive ecosystem approach framework, and is heavily influenced by participatory action research methodology. The tsunami resulted in loss of life, shelter, property and livelihoods in these communities. This profile presents an overview of the project, the two settlements, and the impact of the tsunami on the communities. This article also discusses the impact of the disaster on the direction and nature of the ecohealth project.

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) exist to transform data into knowledge and present this knowledge in various formats for the purpose of supporting decisions. In doing so, GIS are portrayed as knowledge-based systems that are free from bias. In fact, GIS is a socially constructed technology. The entire process of GIS production, from software development to data creation, analysis, visualization and interpretation of GIS output, is characterized by political, economic and social motivations. This paper presents a model of communication for GIS that illuminates the potential for GIS to both marginalise and empower vulnerable and excluded groups in environmental management and planning situations at each stage of the GIS production process. Inclusive and empowering uses of GIS in recent research in South India are discussed. In particular, GIS was central to a process of conceptual and environmental modelling intended to support rehabilitation and management of the Cooum River in Chennai. This process incorporated the perspectives of citizens and NGOs into expression of system relationships that were represented in a GIS-based Decision Support System and simulation model. The process led to identification of qualitatively different kinds of system interventions than were tried (and failed) in the past to rehabilitate this extremely stressed system.

The study looks into the organising principles in the environmental characteristics of slums in Madras (now known as Chennai) using the data of the 1986 Survey of slums in Madras Metropolitan Area. There were 996 slums with and estimated 127000 families. The Study organised the database in a GIS environment. Using principal components analysis, the slums are classified into six types. Both principal components analysis and exploratory mapping of the database have helped to know the geographic organisation of slums in Madras.

The relationship between water resource management and the ‘upstream’ determinants of health is emerging as a new portfolio of research, policy and practice. This development is informed by growing attention to ecosystem management in the context of catchments (also known as watersheds or river basins) and the potential ‘win-win’ of integrated strategies that improve both health and sustainability within these settings. Sustainable and equitable watershed management can be seen as an upstream driver of the determinants of health – with influences ranging from livelihoods and poverty, to cultural values, food security and lifestyles, as well provision of basic water services and infrastructure. Drawing on an integrated framework and the key concepts of ‘living systems’, ‘livelihoods’, and ‘linkages’ between ecosystems and equity, this paper examines integrated catchment management as the basis for an ecosystem approach that promotes water for life, health and sustainability. These concepts will be examined in the context of a community catchment health project in New Zealand, with cross-reference to initiatives in Hawai’i, Ecuador, Canada and the Philippines. Implications will be discussed in relation to capacity building for governance, research and education that values catchment management as a collaborative, cross-sectoral initiative with interrelated benefits for health, ecosystems and society.

The problems involved in the environmental management of Cooum River in Chennai, India, relate not merely to pollution and environmental degradation, but to a complex situation involving linkages between social, economic and physical systems. For managing this complex problem, and Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management (AEAM) approach is considered. The use of a series of workshops of the key actors, the development of a dynamic system model and the potential role of geographic information systems are discussed. Details of the procedure for operationalizing the AEAM process for the Chennai project are presented.

This paper presents the results of a workshop held in August 2002 in support of an action-oriented program of research that adopts an ecosystem approach to human health in Chennai, India. The workshop brought together stakeholders and potential participants in the research program in a collaborative environment to explore environment and health relationships, identify key actors and stakeholders in managing for human health, and develop a conceptual model of environment and health in Chennai. The workshop also introduced the ecosystem approach to workshop participants and explored the feasibility of applying the approach in Chennai. This paper is intended to highlight the use of a stakeholder workshop within an ecosystem approach, as well as techniques employed in the workshop’s working sessions. Influences on the workshop come from soft systems methodology, adaptive management and participatory action research. Working sessions were oriented to problem identification and framing, system conceptualization and visioning. Workshop participants developed a diagrammatic expression of environment and health in Chennai known as a ‘rich picture.’ Important themes in environment and health were drawn from this expression, such as: slums as locations of most -vulnerable populations and objectionable conditions; surface water quality and water bourne disease (e.g., typhoid, cholera, diarrhea, dysentery); public participation in management of environment and health problems; and malaria. Workshop participants also helped to identify a mixed-methods approach to addressing these issues in slum areas. The workshop results are now being used to direct the broader program of research.

Executive Summary

The links between ecosystem approaches to health, natural resource management and poverty reduction are being identified as important and relevant across an increasing number of disciplines and institutions. However, specific implementation guidance is scant. One promising approach to addressing this gap is the integration of two emergent approaches to environmental management: Ecohealth, which argues that human health and well-being are not only dependent on ecosystems but are also important outcomes of effective ecosystem management; and Watershed-based integrated water resources management (IWRM) which is based on the premise that watersheds are appropriate units for managing ecosystems.

Over the past century, the dominant scientific approach to environment and health relationships has been to examine cause and effect relationships between “proximal” environmental exposures and their health effects. Much progress has been made with this kind of work, but the complex, reciprocal interactions among ecosystems, society and health demand a more integrated and systemic approach. Recent convergence of research, policy and practice that re-links the social and ecological context for health lead us to understand that: in coupled social-ecological systems the same driving forces can result in combined social and environmental health inequities, hazards and impacts; policies that decrease social inequities and improve social cohesion have the potential to improve health outcomes and also to minimize and offset the drivers of ecosystem change; and linked social-ecological actions that address both biophysical and social environments have the potential to create a “double-dividend” that improves health by addressing both its socio-economic and environmental determinants, while also promotingsustainable development.

Traditionally, our understanding and management of human health has been organized spatially on the basis of human constructs such as municipalities, counties, health authorities, and provinces or states. While these boundaries do influence environmental and resource management, they often overlook the structure and function of ecosystems, and create a disjuncture between the objects of management and biophysical processes (e.g., between health and nature). A wide range of international reports have now created a demand and imperative to identify specific ecosystem-based contexts in which linkages among health, ecosystems, development and poverty alleviation can be operationalized.

One response to these challenges has been to recognize and prioritize watersheds as appropriate spatial units around which to organize management for natural resources and health.Watershed management and ecosystem approaches offer useful approaches to water management within the physical “place” of the watershed or catchment. Using key management concepts such as resilience, such approaches have the potential to improve our ability to reduce vulnerability to natural hazards, maintain ecological flows of water and the provision of other ecological services, and to promote the long-term sustainability of coupled human and natural systems. Ecosystem approaches and IWRM almost always cite collaborative decision-making and adaptive institutions as central to their approach.Mechanisms to operate such approaches must navigate overlapping jurisdictions, conflicting mandates and multiple interests, while at the same time adapting and responding to new information and operating in contexts of uncertainty.

The challenge remains to establish frameworks and processes that speak not only to public health professionals, but also to ecologists, water managers, planners and the development community. Despite the potential value in explicitly addressing concerns about human health and well-being on a watershed basis, a myriad of challenges exist—many of which reflect the limitations of restricting focus on separate parts of social-ecological systems rather than the interconnections of human and natural systems. These include the challenges of working across jurisdictions and sectors; of integrating academic disciplines and multiple worldviews; of spatial-temporal scale and the relationship between systems defined at different scales; and of the complexity of issues pertaining to each aspect of these social-ecological systems (including climate and atmospheric processes, land uses, ecological processes, social networks, livelihoods and lifestyles). The table below summarizes key issues identified by this report and offers directions for further work.

In coupled social–ecological systems, the same driving forces can result in combined social and environmental health inequities, hazards, and impacts. Policies that decrease social inequities and improve social cohesion, however, also have the potential to improve health outcomes and to minimize and offset the drivers of ecosystem change. Actions that address both biophysical and social environments have the potential to create a "double dividend" that improves human health, while also promoting sustainable development. One promising approach to managing the complex, reciprocal interactions among ecosystems, society, and health is the integration of the ecohealth approach (which holds that human health and well-being are both dependent on ecosystems and are important outcomes of ecosystem management) with watershed-based water resources management. Using key management concepts such as resilience, such approaches can help reduce vulnerability to natural hazards, maintain ecological flows of water and the provision of other ecological services, and promote long-term sustainability of coupled human and natural systems. Priorities for understanding and realizing health benefits of watershed management include (i) addressing poverty and reducing inequities, (ii) promoting resilience (for health) in watersheds, and (iii) applying watersheds as a context for intersectoral management tools and policy integration. Examples of work linking health and watershed management demonstrate that not only is appreciation of complex systems important, but an effective approach is participatory and transdisciplinary and gives attention to equity and historical context.


Key words: ecohealth; ecosystem approach; environment and health; environmental determinants of health; health promotion; integrated water resources management; resilience; social determinants of health; watershed governance; watershed management

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are computer-based tools used to collect, store, manipulate and display spatially-referenced information. They are used to support decision-making in a wide variety of contexts, including spatial planning and environmental management. Because the process of GIS production, from software development to visualization of GIS output, is characterized by political, economic and social motivations, it is important that GIS practitioners are aware of issues such as access to data and the political economy of information, and the nature of GIS epistemologies vis-à-vis multiple coexisting perceptions of reality. Lack of such appreciation can lead to social and spatial marginalization of communities. Use of GIS in a research program for environmental management of the Cooum River in Chennai, and in support of participatory processes for managing environment and health in slums are used to demonstrate appropriate applications of GIS in India. Internet-distributed GIS as a potential avenue to address issues of public access to data is also considered.

"Web-distributed tools that complement community-based environmental monitoring (CBEM) initiatives can improve processing of and access to information, supporting environmental education and better informing decision-making. To this end a web-based geographic information system known as “Juturna” was developed to support CBEM in the vicinity of Toronto, Canada. This web-GIS facilitates input, analysis, and reporting of community data. However, use of the system steadily declined in activity since this initiative started in 2004. Lay users reported that the system was complicated and confusing, and so discouraged use. Also, it employed expensive proprietary software, which was a disincentive for the local Conservation Authority and collaborating NGO to adopt the system.

To revitalize use of the website and provide support to the CBEM program, we undertook to redesign the web-GIS using open source software. To understand why the original web-GIS was not well used and to inform redesign of the system, we implemented a user-centered design methodology. Methods included user testing, rapid prototyping and stakeholder interviews. The process was invaluable in prioritizing user tasks, defining characteristics of users of the website, and identifying those components of the web-GIS most confounding to them. Findings were used to inform re-development of the web-GIS through an iterative process that led to the creation of two prototypes that were evaluated by the user audience and so informed the design of a new (more accessible) website."

"An anthology of peer-reviewed work resulting from faculty-student collaboration in the Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University\

This is an edited volume highlighting collaborative research achievements among faculty and students at the Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University in Toronto, Canada. The book is organized in three sections:

Section 1: In our backyard: Toronto and its environs’
Section 2: Beyond our backyard - North America
Section 3: Our Global Community

A pdf of the introduction "Change Your World(view): A Setting for Interdisciplinary Research and Action" by Femida Handy and Martin Bunch can be downloaded from this site.

For a copy of this book contact:

Steve Glassman
Director, Bookstore, Printing & Mailing Services
York University Bookstore
4700 Keele Street
Toronto, ON, Canada
M3J 1P3
tel: (416) 736-2100 x 33018
fax:(416) 736-5733"

"Excerpt from the introduction by Handy and Bunch:

"Effective integration of knowledge requires a certain fluency in multiple academic disciplines, and an ability to bridge them. Beyond this, relevant application of knowledge to real world problems and issues requires the ability to reach beyond the purely academic realm to mobilize and engage with communities, governmental actors, non-governmental organizations and others. Frodeman and Mitcham (2007) point out that environmental studies is one of only very few fields that are at once; sensitive to questions of knowledge, values and their implications for society; that bridge the sciences and humanities; and that involve the general public in an interdisciplinary approach to developing an understanding of societal issues and problems. This approach, that Frodeman and Mitcham refer to as “critical interdisciplinarity,” builds deep pertinent knowledge about issues and problems (beyond purely disciplinary knowledge) by,

    "…[seeking] to take the effort involved in mastering or going deep in any one discipline and spread it over a number of disciplines, going just as deep in a discipline as is necessary or appropriate to grasp the essentials."

They continue by stating that,

    "Interdisciplinarity must be given a scope as wide knowledge itself, spanning the entire space from the natural sciences to the humanities. Although its breadth will, of course, include the social sciences, the insistent focus needs to be on the fundamentally humanistic question of what counts as pertinent knowledge. Knowledge for what? We need not merely to describe the role of values within science and society – the role of the social sciences – but also to assess these values, working with society as it struggles to address questions of social and environmental justice, human freedom and responsibility, and the proper roles of the public and private sectors" (p. 513).

This is the sense of interdisciplinarity (encompassing a broad range of cross- trans- and inter-disciplinary definitions) that pervades the Faculty of Environmental Studies at York University. With this in mind, the Faculty of Environmental Studies at York (FES) has since its inception in 1968, mandated that students and faculty pursue an interdisciplinary approach to their studies so as to be able to express their academic creativity and discover new ways of synthesizing information. This reflects an understanding that many of the problems of our time, both local and global – from fighting global epidemics to preparing for natural disasters, from mediating forced human migrations to resolving ethno-political conflict, from revitalizing cities to revolutionizing women’s roles – cannot be comprehended or solved by insulated thinking. Student and faculty research at FES has used and integrated conceptual and methodological tools of many disciplines to understand these complex and pressing issues and to contribute to their resolution.""