Back to THE PRESIDENT'S COLUMN: DREAMS OF A MILLENNIAL PRESIDENT

Up to Table of Contents

Ahead to 1999 STUDENT AWARDS

DIALOGUE ON INTERNATIONALIZATION

In the May 1999 newsletter, we discussed several aspects of internationalizing SCB. We considered the membership distribution, recent steps that have been taken by the Board of Governors to internationalize SCB, and potential new ways to further this goal. We were pleased to receive a number of responses to our call for feedback. Most respondents agreed strongly that because much of the world's biodiversity and fundamental conservation challenges lie outside the U.S., it is vital that SCB become more international in its membership, governance, activities, and journal authorship. We were encouraged by the comment "I strongly disagree with the position that we probably cannot become a fully international society despite our best efforts' . . . we need to be patient, define achievable short-term objectives, and admit that the development of a truly international SCB will take some time--but is possible." We would like to hear whether others also believe this is the route to follow.

We specifically requested suggestions for ways to increase the representation of authors and policy issues from outside the U.S. in Conservation Biology. Several respondents advocated diversifying the composition of the Board of Editors, perhaps even establishing editorial offices on different continents. One speculated that in addition to encouraging submission of manuscripts from other countries, a more international editorial board would increase the breadth of topics addressed in letters to the Editor and opinion sections of the journal. Another respondent proposed that the journal publish special supplements on regional conservation issues. This step would expose current members to conservation concerns outside their geographic area of specialization and might encourage scientists in the highlighted locations to become members of SCB.

A further suggestion was that SCB publish Spanish translations of complete manuscripts in Conservation Biology. This would increase its accessibility to researchers, practitioners, and policy makers throughout central and South America. One member commented that authors often receive reprint requests from a surprising number of countries, which may indicate that the journal has a wide international readership. Alternatively, international awareness may be facilitated by electronic abstracting services regardless of the actual circulation of the journal.

Feedback to our suggestion that SCB facilitate the creation of a suite of related organizations was largely positive. Members supported both the establishment of new regional conservation biology societies and linking with existing local organizations. It was pointed out that the latter might be achieved by organizing symposia and workshops at regional meetings. However, one person cautioned that the global SCB and its journal should take care not to overshadow the operations of smaller societies.

Finally, one respondent to our article suggested that SCB's "foothold" in the U.S. can serve as an advantage rather than a detriment to achieving global conservation goals. This member noted that SCB's basis in the U.S. places it in an "ideal position for facilitating the transfer of technology and resources."

Please continue to send us your thoughts on how SCB can become a more international society. We would particularly like to hear from people who are interested in forming new regional SCB affiliate organizations.

Malcolm Hunter
hunter@umenfa.maine.edu

Georgina Mace
g.mace@ucl.ac.uk

Back to THE PRESIDENT'S COLUMN: DREAMS OF A MILLENNIAL PRESIDENT

Up to Table of Contents

Ahead to 1999 STUDENT AWARDS