Desertification: Loss of credibility despite the evidence
(2003) In Annals of Arid Zone 42(3-4). p.271-287- Abstract
- The reasons for loss of credibility are first scientism and evasion, which feed oversimplification and confusion as the primary reasons. A case study from central Sudan is used to illustrate of these issues. Credibility has drained away with the deflection of focus from matters that are patently “ desertification” ; and with the deployment of confusing science. The choice to emphasize land degradation was the crucial misjudgement. Land degradation is very difficult to assess, and is anyway seldom the critical issue in dryland management. Evidence is then given for seven types of desertification, in two categories, all of which, on the contrary, are measurable and demonstrably important constraints on drylands production. The “ local”... (More)
- The reasons for loss of credibility are first scientism and evasion, which feed oversimplification and confusion as the primary reasons. A case study from central Sudan is used to illustrate of these issues. Credibility has drained away with the deflection of focus from matters that are patently “ desertification” ; and with the deployment of confusing science. The choice to emphasize land degradation was the crucial misjudgement. Land degradation is very difficult to assess, and is anyway seldom the critical issue in dryland management. Evidence is then given for seven types of desertification, in two categories, all of which, on the contrary, are measurable and demonstrably important constraints on drylands production. The “ local” issues are dune and sand ovement, salinisation and falling water tables. The global issues are devegetation, dust, and rainfall decline. The global concerns need global management. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/789543
- author
- Warren, Andrew and Olsson, Lennart LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2003
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Annals of Arid Zone
- volume
- 42
- issue
- 3-4
- pages
- 271 - 287
- publisher
- Arid Zone Research Association of India
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:10644234924
- ISSN
- 0570-1791
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- a405d8d6-eab7-4395-846d-2e0ec35015a5 (old id 789543)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-04 09:17:59
- date last changed
- 2022-02-21 00:05:23
@article{a405d8d6-eab7-4395-846d-2e0ec35015a5, abstract = {{The reasons for loss of credibility are first scientism and evasion, which feed oversimplification and confusion as the primary reasons. A case study from central Sudan is used to illustrate of these issues. Credibility has drained away with the deflection of focus from matters that are patently “ desertification” ; and with the deployment of confusing science. The choice to emphasize land degradation was the crucial misjudgement. Land degradation is very difficult to assess, and is anyway seldom the critical issue in dryland management. Evidence is then given for seven types of desertification, in two categories, all of which, on the contrary, are measurable and demonstrably important constraints on drylands production. The “ local” issues are dune and sand ovement, salinisation and falling water tables. The global issues are devegetation, dust, and rainfall decline. The global concerns need global management.}}, author = {{Warren, Andrew and Olsson, Lennart}}, issn = {{0570-1791}}, language = {{eng}}, number = {{3-4}}, pages = {{271--287}}, publisher = {{Arid Zone Research Association of India}}, series = {{Annals of Arid Zone}}, title = {{Desertification: Loss of credibility despite the evidence}}, volume = {{42}}, year = {{2003}}, }