Public Resources

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/10166/5962

Browse

Recent Submissions

Now showing 1 - 20 of 46
  • ItemOpen Access
    Boundary Objects and Global Consensus: Scalar Narratives of Marine Conservation in the Convention on Biological Diversity
    (Global Environmental Politics, 2014) Noella J. Gray; Rebecca L. Gruby; Lisa M. Campbell
    The global number of marine protected areas (MPAs) has increased dramatically in recent years, resulting in a ªvefold increase in area covered since 2003.1 Like terrestrial protected areas, MPAs are deªned by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) as any “clearly deªned geographical space, recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values.”2 They range in size, purpose, resource use policies, and governance structures, for example, from large no-take areas identifed for their ecological value and administered by states, to small, multi-use areas protected by communities. “Marine protected area” is thus an umbrella term that refers to a variety of spatial approaches to marine conservation.
  • ItemOpen Access
    Fuel for the Fire: Biofuels and the Problem of Translation at the Tenth Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity
    (Global Environmental Politics, 2014) Deborah Scott; Sarah Hitchner; Edward M. Maclin; Luis Dammer B. Juan
    Since their emergence as a major global concern in the early 2000s, biofuels have proven to be complex, multifaceted, and problematic objects to govern.1 The Convention on Biological Diversity’s (CBD) decision on “Biofuels and Biodiversity,” negotiated at the Tenth Conference of the Parties (COP10), represents an instance of failed translation, using Callon’s concept of a mechanism that guides the coproduction of science and society.2 In international environmental governance forums such as the CBD, various actors aim to collectively translate diverse networks of entities, human and non-human, into governable objects. Drawing from ethnographic data collected at CBD COP10, we identify three debates that characterize the struggle to translate the multiplicity of feedstocks, production processes, and stakeholders that collectively comprise “biofuels” into a singular, governable object: setting the scope of the decision, addressing the positive impacts of biofuels on biodiversity, and balancing the authority of claims around synthetic biology. Through these debates, we trace strategies of rendering political issues “technical,” relying on formal text to stabilize contested identities, and restricting the sources of knowledge drawn upon. We suggest that the CBD parties experiment with new strategies, taking advantage of the COP’s legal flexibility and the CBD’s institutional history of engaging with the political nature of scientific knowledge.
  • ItemOpen Access
    Oceans at Rio+20
    (Conservation Letters, 2013) Lisa M. Campbell; Noella J. Gray; Luke W. Fairbanks; Jennifer J. Silver; Rebecca L. Gruby
    In this article, we examine oceans outcomes from the Third United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (or Rio+20) in relation to how ocean problems and solutions were defined and by whom. We highlight the extent to which problem and solution definitions were shared among participants, in relation to three specific issues on the agenda at Rio+20: conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, small-scale fisheries, and ocean acidification. We find that discussions about each of these issues reflect three challenges recognized as complicating oceans management: mismatches between ecological and governance scale, homogeneity among in- terest groups advocating for ocean conservation, and increased interest in both protection and exploitation of ocean resources. Overall, we found little evi- dence of constructive dialogue at Rio+20, where participants focused on ad- vancing predefined positions, and we consider the implications of our analysis for ultimately addressing our three focal issues and for oceans management more generally.
  • ItemOpen Access
    Negotiating the Nagoya Protocol: Indigenous Demands for Justice
    (Global Environmental Politics, 2014) Kimberly R. Marion Suiseeya
    On October 29, 2010, following two weeks of intense negotiations, parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) at the Tenth Conference of Parties (COP10) in Nagoya, Japan, adopted the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Beneªts Arising from their Utilization. Although points of contention were few, they were substantive: beyond defining what resources and knowledge would be covered under the regime, negotiations centered on determining how to fairly distribute benefits from the use of genetic resources and deciding with whom benefits would be shared. Discussions threatened to break down almost daily, as parties would not budge from their positions. Just after the deadline to complete the final negotiations passed, negotiators announced that no agreement on access and benefits sharing (ABS) could be reached. Many parties and observers left the room in frustration; delegates were overheard saying “we failed,” and news of the failure circulated rapidly throughout the conference venue.1
  • ItemOpen Access
    “As Far as Possible and as Appropriate”: Implementing the Aichi Biodiversity Targets
    (Conservation Letters, 2016) Shannon M. Hagerman; Ricardo Pelai
    Past shortfalls to meet global biodiversity targets have simultaneously prompted questions about the relevance of global environmental conventions, and sparked renewed ambition, for example, in the form of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. While progress toward the Aichi Targets through the Convention on Biological Diversity is well-documented globally, less is known at the national level. We conducted a systematic content analysis of 154 documents to assess the nature and extent of national implementation of the Aichi Targets using Canada as a case study. Results indicate that most responses are aspirational, with only 28% of responses implemented. Implemented responses tend to be associated with targets with specified levels of ambition that emphasize biophysical values, or targets that are relatively straightforward to achieve in this context (e.g., knowledge capacity and awareness). In contrast, targets focused on equity, rights, or policy reform were associated with fewer actions. Implementation of this latter class of targets is arguably stalled not solely because of a lack of effective target design, but because of lack of fit within existing institutional commitments. This suggests that solutions—in terms of improving implementation—lie not only in overcoming known dilemmas of quantifiability, but also in fostering institutional transformation.
  • ItemOpen Access
    Science, Policy Advocacy, and Marine Protected Areas
    (Conservation Biology, 2008) Noella J. Gray; Lisa M. Campbell
    Much has been written in recent years regarding whether and to what extent scientists should engage in the policy process, and the focus has been primarily on the issue of advocacy. Despite extensive theoretical discussions, little has been done to study attitudes toward and consequences of such advocacy in particular cases. We assessed attitudes toward science and policy advocacy in the case of marine protected areas (MPAs) on the basis of a survey of delegates at the First International Marine Protected Areas Congress.Delegates were all members of the international marine conservation community and represented academic, government, and nongovernmental organizations. A majority of respondents believed science is objective but only a minority believed that values can be eliminated from science. Respondents showed only partial support of positivist principles of science. Almost all respondents supported scientists being integrated into MPA policy making, whereas half of the respondents agreed that scientists should actively advocate for particular MPA policies. Scientists with a positivist view of science supported a minimal role for scientists in policy, whereas government staff with positivist beliefs supported an advocacy or decision-making role for scientists. Policy-making processes for MPAs need to account for these divergent attitudes toward science and advocacy if science-driven and participatory approaches are to be reconciled.
  • ItemOpen Access
    Toward a Social Science Research Agenda for Large Marine Protected Areas
    (Conservation Letters, 2015) Rebecca L. Gruby; Noella J. Gray; Lisa M. Campbell; Leslie Acton
    Large marine protected areas (LMPAs) are a high-profile trend in global marine conservation. Although the social sciences have become well integrated into marine protected area research and practice, human dimensions considerations have not been an early priority in the development of many LMPAs. This article argues that because LMPAs exhibit unique characteristics in form, function, and/or conceptualization, they warrant a distinct social science research agenda. We outline an agenda for social science research on and for LMPAs in four related themes: scoping of human dimensions, governance, politics, and social and economic outcomes. The article is informed by interviews, participant observation at the 2014 World Parks Congress, a literature review and the authors’ research experiences. LMPAs are at an early stage in what promises to be a globally significant, long-term project of ocean conservation and governance. There is a timely opportunity to translate relevant insights from decades of social science research to LMPAs and generate new knowledge, where necessary, to give them their best chance at biological and social success.
  • ItemOpen Access
    Scalar Politics and the Region: Strategies for Transcending Pacific Island Smallness on a Global Environmental Governance Stage
    (Environment and Planning A, 2013) Rebecca L. Gruby; Lisa M. Campbell
    This paper examines the process through which a region was enacted and politically mobilized at the tenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (CoP10) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). We draw on concepts from scalar politics and new regional geography, data collected as part of a collaborative event ethnography of CoP10, and interviews with Palauan delegates to theorize the enactment of an oceanic Pacific Region as a scalar strategy directed toward transcending the practical and imagined smallness of Pacific small island developing states (SIDS) within the CoP10 meeting context and global imaginations. We conclude that the Pacific Region construct enhances Pacific SIDS’ capacity to participate in CoP10, although their collective influence remains relatively limited compared with others. Most significantly, the Pacific Region imaginary of a vast ocean space and network of people committed to the CBD and biodiversity conservation positions Pacific Islanders to play a pivotal role in conserving a significant portion of the world’s oceans. In the context of increasing global attention to marine conservation, the enactment of such a Pacific Region is likely to aid in attracting international recognition, attention, and support. By conveying how and why a diverse group of state and nonstate actors enacted an international and oceanic region at CoP10, we contribute understanding of strategic regionalization within the scalar politics literature and further disrupt understandings of an ontologically given, land-based region conceptualized on continental or subcontinental spatial scales.
  • ItemOpen Access
    Capturing the Personal in Politics: Ethnographies of Global Environmental Governance
    (Global Environmental Politics, 2014) Catherine Corson; Lisa M. Campbell; Kenneth I. MacDonald
    In writing about Barack Obama’s efforts to entice Republicans into ending US Congressional gridlock, news columnist John Avalon wrote, “All politics is personal and at the end of the day, in a representative democracy, decisions are made by people in a room.”1 While he focused on the role of personal relationships in “a representative democracy,” political decisions are made by “people in a room” across diverse forms of government. Accounting for what happens in that room, and theorizing how and why it happens, is a critical challenge for policy researchers. It requires focusing on the conduct of politics in everyday practice, and it necessitates studying the individual motivations, relationships, and agency that shape policies, institutions, and regimes. It also demands attention to the ways in which bureaucratic norms shape who can speak and how, as well as the ways in which multiple political, social, and cultural phenomena converge, conditioning which ideas, narratives, and practices subsequently become institutionalized. We argue that such details are best captured in real time, by researchers who are also “in the room” to observe and record the everyday practices of policy-making. We argue for the use of ethnography as a core method in research on global environmental politics. As O’Neill et al. highlighted, the study of environmental governance requires attention to dynamic relations of power and authority; the often unpredictable, nonlinear, and contingent trajectories of policies; and the complexity of environmental problems and multiple scales at which environmental governance occurs.2 However, capturing these dynamic relations, contingent trajectories, and complex, trans-scalar processes is challenging, particularly given the dispersed nature of current environmental policymaking processes across sites and scales.
  • ItemOpen Access
    The Receiving End of Reform: Everyday Responses to Neoliberalisation in Southeastern Mexico
    (Antipode, 2010) Peter R. Wilshusen
    This article builds upon the literature on neoliberalism and environment as well as studies on community forestry by examining the creative accommodations that rural producers have made in navigating Mexico’s neoliberal turn. In contrast to previous work that emphasizes macro-level processes (eg privatization of public natural resources) and local resistance, I employ Bourdieu’s theory of practice to examine the symbolic and material dimensions of local responses to neoliberal policy reform. Drawing on research from nine communities in the state of Quintana Roo, I argue that local producers have accommodated neoliberal policies and programs by adopting hybrid logics, property regimes, forms of organization, and modes of exchange. Moreover, I contend that these creative responses constitute elements of a longstanding “culture of accommodation” to institutional change that predates Mexico’s neoliberal reforms.
  • ItemOpen Access
    Assembling Global Conservation Governance
    (Geoforum, 2019) Catherine Corson; Lisa M. Campbell; Peter Wilshusen; Noella J. Gray
    As the configuration of global environmental governance has become more complex over the past fifty years, numerous scholars have underscored the importance of understanding the transnational networks of public, private and nonprofit organizations that comprise it. Most methodologies for studying governance emphasize social structural elements or institutional design principles and focus less attention on the social interactions that generate diffuse, hybrid regimes. Yet capturing the dynamics of these networks requires a relational methodology that can account for a range of elements that constantly shift and change relative to overlapping institutional boundaries. Collaborative Event Ethnography draws on insights from multi-sited, team, and institutional ethnography to assemble teams of researchers to study major international conferences, which offer important political spaces where public, private, and nonprofit actors align around sanctioned logics and techniques of governance. Drawing on insights generated from these conferences and field sites across the globe, we trace the constitutive forces behind paradigm shifts in biodiversity conservation, specifically the interconnected rise of market-based approaches, global targets, and new conservation enclosures. We show how the iterative refining of the methodology over five events generated an increasingly robust understanding of global conservation governance as processual, dynamic, and contingent, constituted through constantly shifting assemblages of state and nonstate actors, devices and narratives that collectively configure fields of governance. Finally, we reflect on how our team, as an evolving combination of researchers, research interests, and data collection tools—itself an assemblage, —has informed the continual refinement of the methodology and generated novel understandings of global conservation governance.
  • ItemOpen Access
    Collaborative Event Ethnography: Conservation and Development Trade-offs at the Fourth World Conservation Congress
    (Conservation and Society, 2010) J. Peter Brosius; Lisa M. Campbell
    Ideas about conservation have shifted dramatically over the last century. From an early focus on state-run parks and protected areas, to the role of local communities and markets in conservation, to engaging the private sector, what conservation is and how we go about doing it continues to evolve (Adams & Hulme 2001; Brosius 2006). While there have been many shifts, in this study we are interested in the recent emphasis on ‘the global’ as the scale at which conservation policies and practices are conceptualised, articulated, and (ideally) implemented (Taylor & Buttel 1992). This shift, or scalingup, is evident in a number of trends: the emergence of ‘big’ international NGOs as key actors in conservation (Chapin 2004); increased emphasis on conservation practice at large, transboundary scales (ecoregions, seascapes) dictated ostensibly by ecology (Brosius & Russell 2003); the continued proliferation of protected areas, the dominant symbol (and measure) of western-influenced nature conservation (Zimmerer 2006); and, of particular interest in our research, the increased use of international meetings and agreements to establish the goals, targets, and means of achieving conservation. This collection of nine papers is a result of research conducted at one such meeting—the Fourth World Conservation Congress (WCC) hosted by the World Conservation Union (IUCN) in Barcelona, October 5–14, 2008. The IUCN is the world’s ‘largest global environmental network’, whose stated mission is to ‘influence, encourage and assist societies throughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any use of natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable’ (http://www.iucn.org/about/). IUCN was originally formed in 1948 as the International Union for the Preservation of Nature, and is a hybrid of government and private interest groups (McCormick 1989). Today, with more than 1,000 member organisations in 140 countries (including 200+ government and 800+ non-government organisations), as well as almost 11,000 volunteer scientists in six commissions (http://www.iucn.org/about/), IUCN continues to exert a major influence in the global conservation domain. While often compared to the ‘big three’ non-government international conservation organisations (Conservation International, WWF, The Nature Conservancy), it is fundamentally different and more akin to a multilateral UN agency, though with private sector members as well.1 Until recently, the IUCN did very little implementation of conservation, casting itself as a scientific authority to inform and track conservation rather than implement it. Its most well-known products are the IUCN’s Red List of Threatened SpeciesTM and its system of categorising protected areas, often used to compare national commitments to conservation (http://www.iucn.org/about/ union/commissions/wcpa/wcpa_overview/). Through such initiatives, IUCN has been an important player in determining not only what conservation should be, but also how it should be measured.
  • ItemOpen Access
    Grabbing ‘Green’: Cynical Reason, Instrumental Ethics and the Production of ‘The Green Economy
    (Human Geography, 2013) Kenneth Iain MacDonald
    This paper traces the institutionalization of Environmentalism as a pre-condition for the production of ‘The Green Economy,’ particularly the containment of the oppositional possibilities of an environmentalist politics within the institutional and organizational terrain of a transnational managerial and capitalist class. This is a context in which many environmental organizations – once the site of planning, mobilizing and implementing opposition and resistance to the environmentally destructive practices of corporate industrialism – have become part of a new project of accumulation grounded in enclosure, access and the production and exchange of new environmental commodities. This transformation reflects what Sloterdijk (1988) has termed cynical reason – an enlightened false consciousness; and my concern in the paper is to think through ‘The Green Economy’ and its coincident instrumental ethics as an iteration of cynical reason and an expression of institutionalized power. Specifically, I focus on the development of ‘global environmental governance’ as a statist project that concentrates sanctioning authority and resource allocation in centers of accumulation (e.g., the Convention on Biological Diversity and its funding mechanism the Global Environment Facility) and facilitates the containment of Environmentalism as an oppositional politics through demands that it assume conventional forms of organization, projectification and professionalisation and through facilitating a redefinition and redeployment that shifts environmentalism from a space of hope to an instrumentalist mechanism in rationalist projects of accumulation.
  • ItemOpen Access
    What Does Collaborative Event Ethnography Tell Us About Global Environmental Governance?
    (Global Environmental Politics, 2014) Rosaleen Duffy
    This special issue on collaborative event ethnography (CEE) provides an important contribution to our understanding of global environmental governance (GEG), illustrating the value of ethnographic work to analyze how conventions work, how alliances are formed, and how particular ideas rise to prominence while others are rendered invisible. In this forum, I place the collection of articles in the context of broader debates on the shifting nature of governance in the global system.
  • ItemUnknown
    Blue Economy and Competing Discourses in International Oceans Governance
    (Journal of Environment and Development, 2015) Jennifer J. Silver; Noella J. Gray; Lisa M. Campbell; Luke W. Fairbanks; Rebecca L. Gruby
    In this article, we track a relatively new term in global environmental governance: “blue economy.” Analyzing preparatory documentation and data collected at the 2012 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (i.e., Rioþ20), we show how the term entered into use and how it was articulated within four competing discourses regarding human–ocean relations: (a) oceans as natural capital, (b) oceans as good business, (c) oceans as integral to Pacific Small Island Developing States, and (d) oceans as small-scale fisheries livelihoods. Blue economy was consistently invoked to connect oceans with Rioþ20’s “green economy” theme; however, different actors worked to further define the term in ways that prioritized particular oceans problems, solutions, and participants. It is not clear whether blue economy will eventually be understood singularly or as the domain of a particular actor or discourse. We explore possibilities as well as discuss discourse in global environmental governance as powerful and precarious.
  • ItemUnknown
    Area Expansion Versus Effective and Equitable Management in International Marine Protected Areas Goals and Targets
    (Marine Policy, 2019) Noella J. Gray; Lisa M. Campbell
    This paper draws on the published literature on marine protected areas (MPAs) and marine protected areas targets to argue that the MPA target (14.5) will dominate in the pursuit, measurement, and evaluation of the much broader ‘oceans’ Sustainable Development Goal (SDG14) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in 2015. MPAs are a ‘privileged solution’ in marine conservation, in part because their expansion is relatively easy to measure and there is opportunity for further expansion in the mostly unprotected global ocean. However, the evolution of MPA targets over time in organizations like the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) illustrates the importance of other means for achieving conservation and of elements other than area coverage, including the need to ensure MPAs are effectively and equitably managed. By excluding these important, but contested, complex, and difficult to measure components, Target 14.5 is likely to be met. However, the meaning of this success will be limited without concerted efforts get beyond area coverage.
  • ItemUnknown
    Charted Waters? Tracking the Production of Conservation Territories on the High Seas
    (International Social Science Journal, 2018) Noella J. Gray
    From bleached reefs to declining fish stocks and plastic garbage patches, recent research and news headlines suggest that the oceans are in a state of crisis. The crisis is often explained using the “overuse narrative” of the oceans (Steinberg 2008), which highlights how historic human interactions with the oceans have followed a “frontiermentality”. Specifically, the oceans have often been treated as a resource frontier that is paradoxically characterised by both abundance and emptiness; marine resources are seen as abundant, available to be exploited as efficiently and maximally as possible, while marine space is vast and empty, available to absorb waste and pollutants. The recent, rapid decline in marine biodiversity, and its consequences for ecosystem function and services, is a result of this frontier mentality and a key feature of the oceans crisis (Sala and Knowlton 2006). While responses to the various elements of the “oceans crisis” are many and diverse, scientists and conservationists overwhelmingly advocate for marine protected areas (MPAs), especially notake areas, as the preferred tool for marine biodiversity conservation (Gray 2010). The IUCN defines protected areas, including marine protected areas, as any “clearly defined geographical space, recognized, dedicated andmanaged, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values” (Dudley 2008, p.8). The number and spatial extent of MPAs worldwide has increased dramatically in recent years (UNEP-WCMC and IUCN 2016). This increase is emblematic of a broader proliferation of conservation territories, defined by Zimmerer (2006, p.65) as “human-designed spaces of nature protection and resource management”. Conservation territories are spatial interventions premised on legal and/or other institutional systems that rework humanenvironment relations and resource access and control in particular ways. An MPA is thus both a form of territory (Chmara-Huff 2014) and an object of governance (Jentoft et al. 2007). In this paper, I examine the long-term, international effort to enable establishment of MPAs in areas beyond national jurisdiction (“the high seas”), a process that is significant both for its potential to rework the high seas frontier mentality to include conservation and for its implications for the concept of territory.
  • ItemOpen Access
    Gatekeepers and Keymasters: Dynamic Relationships of Access in Geographical Fieldwork
    (The Geographical Review, 2006) Lisa M. Campbell; Noella J. Gray; Zoe A. Meletis; James G. Abbott; Jennifer J. Silver
    This article contributes to ii recent and growing body of literature exploring the nature of fieldwork in human geography. Specifically, we critically examine the role of gatekeepers in providing access to “the field,” based on existing conceptualizations of gatekeepers in the literature and on our own experiences with gatekeepers. We argue that the concept of gatekeepers has been oversimplified, in that relationships between researchers and gatekeepers are often assumed to be unidirectional-with gatekeepers controlling or pro- viding access by researchers-and predominantly static in form and time. Although we accept the necessity and advantages of working through gatekeepers, our experiences suggest that relationships with them are highly complex and evolve over time, with sometimes unex- pected implications for research. In gathering and analyzing data, researchers become gatekeepers themselves, what we are calling “keymasters.” Reconceptualizing the gatekeeper-researcher relationship will contribute to ongoing efforts to more fully understand field-workers as undertaking a practice inherently political, personal, and linked to the production of knowledge. Keywords: access, ga tekeeper, geographical fieldwork, key master, reflexivity, research methods.
  • ItemOpen Access
    The Politics of Indigeneity: Indigenous Strategies for Inclusion in Climate Change Negotiations
    (Conservation and Society, 2010) Amity A. Doolittle
    Indigenous environmental activists have clearly articulated their views on global climate change policy. The content of these views was explored during the 10-day 2008 World Conservation Congress (WCC) in Barcelona. Data were primarily collected through interviews and participant observation. In addition, policy statements and declarations made by indigenous environmental activists from 2000 to 2009 were analysed to place the perspectives of indigenous leaders and environmental activists in the context of their decade-long struggle to gain negotiating power at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. This study examines the rhetorical strategies indigenous leaders from around the world use to gain political recognition and legitimacy in climate change negotiations. Two core principles, relating to a particular representation of indigenous environmental knowledge are identified as fundamental rhetorical tools. These are a belief that the earth is a living being with rights and the conviction that it is the responsibility of indigenous peoples to protect the earth from over-exploitation. However, reference to indigenous environmental knowledge is not the only rhetorical mechanism used by indigenous leaders in the climate debates. When faced with specific United Nations policies to combat climate change that could have a profound impact on their land rights, some indigenous leaders adopt a more confrontational response. Fearing that new polices would reinforce historical trends of marginalisation, indigenous leaders seeking recognition in climate change debates speak less about their ecological knowledge and responsibility to the earth and more about their shared histories of political and economic marginalisation and land dispossession, experienced first through colonialism and more recently through globalisation.
  • ItemOpen Access
    Doing Strong Collaborative Fieldwork In Human Geography
    (Geographical Review, 2019) Noella J. Gray; Catherine Corson; Lisa M. Campbell; Peter R. Wilshusen; Rebecca L. Gruby; Shannon Hagerman
    Although increasingly common in the academy, collaboration is not yet the norm in human geography. Drawing on insights from ten years of experience with collaborative event ethnography (CEE), we argue that strong approaches to collaborative fieldwork offer rich opportunities for human geography. CEE involves teams of researchers conducting fieldwork together at large international events, collaborating on all aspects of the research process from research design to analysis and writing. This paper considers the benefits and challenges of CEE. Some of the benefits associated with strong collaborative fieldwork include: robust, collective interpretation of embodied data that makes room for difference; intellectual and social support for individual researchers; professional development and mentoring; and adaptability. Challenges encompass: Collectively interpreting data produced through individual, embodied experiences; managing team dynamics related to seniority, gender, and disciplinary training; meeting professional and institutional expectations and norms; valuing and recognizing individual contributions; and ensuring sufficient funding to support team preparation, data collection, and analysis. Strong collaborative approaches to fieldwork, like CEE, can cultivate slow scholarship and innovative knowledge production.