Dr. Patrick Hurley
Assistant Professor,
Department of Political Science
College of Charleston
66 George Street
Charleston, SC 29424
Phone: 843-953-0856 Fax: 843-953-8140
Email: hurleyp@cofc.edu
Research Focus
Given my professional experience with biodiversity conservation
planning and graduate research that examined the integration of
conservation science into land-use planning, I am interested in the
influence social and political factors have on private lands
environmental management. This topic has garnered a great deal of attention
in recent years, particularly in rural areas of the western United
States experiencing residential growth (often referred to as ‘exurban’
areas). For example, conservation biologists, conservation planners, and
land-use planners have been asking: 1
) What is the most effective way
for conservation science to influence land-use policy decisions at the
interface between public good and private property; and thus, 2) How can
planning efforts best address the loss of important natural resources on
private lands? While these questions are often addressed from the
perspective of the ecological sciences, at their core these questions
speak to issues of land-use decision-making and politics.
My research on private lands environmental management uses critical perspectives from the
interdisciplinary field of political ecology to explore management practice
in particular places and the social and political realities
that these conservation efforts must negotiate. For example, my dissertation research
critically examined the
Nevada County, California
conservation planning program known as Natural
Heritage 2020 (NH 2020) and the political backlash
that ultimately led to the program's failure. NH 2020 was designed to
implement existing policies in county's 1995 Gener
al Plan
intended to mitigate
for the detrimental impacts of ongoing residential development on the county’s rural environment. Yet, NH 2020 became
deeply controversial, despite continued pleas by the county's elected
officials that the program simply represented ‘good planning.’ By
examining the differential responses to this program by special interest
groups, development interests, landowners, and voters, this research
revealed major splits within what are often thought of as ‘like-minded’
stakeholder groups. The results of this case study emphasize the
importance of understanding the structure of planning programs
and their interaction with local political dynamics.
Currently, I
have three research projects underway. 1) Together with my colleague
Angela Halfacre, I am examining the interaction of community change and
environmental management in the
South Carolina Lowcountry. 2) Building
on my dissertation research, I am working on a comparative study
of county-level conservation planning in the Sierra Nevada region of
California. This pro
ject specifically
examines
the success of Placer Legacy in Placer County, CA (Nevada County's
southern neighbor). 3) Finally,
I am examining the practice of "conservation subdivision"
in the
American West through a comparative
study of several "conservation
communities"
in central Oregon and northern California.
Theoretical Influences
Political ecology provides a robust lens through which to examine the
interaction of environmental management and , because of its
longstanding concern with environmental degradation and the tension
between development and its effects on local peoples. Historically
focused on the so-called Third World, political ecology emphasizes the
importance of case studies that examine local communities, their
dynamics, and the influence that social, political, and economic
processes operating at both local and wider scales have on access to and
control of resources (including land). Political ecologists have argued
that several critical themes from the research done in Third World
contexts are also vital to understanding the environmental politics of
First World settings. These themes include the economic and ecological
context of local production, the legitimacy of local users and uses, the
coherence and capacity of state action, and the role of community
institutions in both defining resources and controlling their use, and
ideologies that guide different types of scientific planning, among
others (see e.g., Blaikie and Brookfield 1987, Bryant and Bailey 1997,
Neumann 1998, Watts 2000).
