**9. References**

Brown, Lester R. 1981. *Building a Sustainable Society*. New York: W. W. Norton.


discovery rates matched or exceeded depletion rates we were comfortably oblivious of

We *Homo sapiens* tended not to ask how sapient this conventional thoughtway truly was. But a substantial portion of our species (we called ourselves "the developed nations") had reverted to foraging―hunting and gathering resources available only in places and amounts determined long ago by nature, not by human management. We had new foraging tools―e.g., drilling rigs and enormous offshore oil platforms, vast digging machines, dynamite, chainsaws, huge pumps, etc.. But reverting to foraging in support of modern living (on a planet we seemed to forget was finite) could not ensure an onward-and-upward future for our species. It ensured instead that we would rapidly deplete nature's deposits of one essential resource after another and continue building our societies around unrealistic expectations of perpetual growth in numbers and affluence, on a planet that would not get

Some sociologists today define their field as a humanistic study (involving "qualitative" reasoning). Others favor a quantitative approach, regarding themselves as adherents of "scientific method." For both types, until they escape the blinding assumptions of the surrounding culture enough to see that reversion to foraging has been a *retrograde* step―which must have serious adverse consequences―sociological efforts to explain future

Council on Environmental Quality and the Department of State. 1980. *Global 2000 Report to* 

Catton, William R., Jr. 1964. "The Development of Sociological Thought." pp. 912-950 in R.

Catton, William R., Jr. 1980 *Overshoot: The Ecological Basis of Revolutionary Change.* Urbana:

Catton, William R., Jr. 1983. "Social and Behavioral Aspects of the Carrying Capacity of

Catton, William R., Jr. 1992. "Separation Versus Unification in Sociological Human Ecology." pp. 65-99 in Lee Freese (ed.), *Advances in Human Ecology*, Vol. 1. Catton, William R., Jr. 2009. *Bottleneck: Humanity's Impending Impasse*. Bloomington, IN:

Deffeyes, Kenneth S. 2005. *Beyond Oil: The View from Hubbert's Peak*. New York: Hill and

Dunlap, Riley E., and William R. Catton, Jr. 2002. "Which Function(s) of the Environment

Duncan, Otis Dudley. 1964. "Social Organization and the Ecosystem." pp. 36-82 in R. E. L. Faris (ed.), *Handbook of Modern Sociology*. Chicago: Rand McNally & Company. Durkheim, Emile. 1893 *De la division du travail social.* [translated by W. D. Halls, as *The* 

Do We Study? A Comparison of Environmental and Natural Resource Sociology."

E. L. Faris (ed.), *Handbook of Modern Sociology*. Chicago: Rand McNally & Company.

Natural Environments." pp. 269-306 in Irwin Altman and J. F. Wohlwill (eds.),

Brown, Lester R. 1981. *Building a Sustainable Society*. New York: W. W. Norton.

*Behavior and the Natural Environment*. New York: Plenum.

*Society and Natural Resources*, 15 (March): 239-249.

*Division of Labor in Society*. New York: Macmillan, 1984.]

*the President*. New York: Pergamon Press.

University of Illinois Press.

Xlibris Corporation.

Wang.

future supply problems.

social change will misfire.

**9. References** 

any larger.


**10** 

*Brazil* 

**Zoological Collections and the Effects of** 

In the area of the biological sciences, it is usual that scientists store biodiversity material in scientific collections. As a means for obtaining greatest results in researches, it becomes

Unfortunately, one recurrently encounters conflict of interests among scientists, affecting the functioning of scientific collections. Although papers illustrating the human side of scientists, including their frailties, are quite popular (e.g., Hellman, 1998), cases specifically

Researchers that study a specific group of organisms seem to create an affective bond so strong for the animals-objects studied that they often act as the owners of some samples of the collection or even of the whole taxonomic group. As a consequence, when exchange and access to material or information are needed, difficulties may be created: samples are hidden

In this chapter, we explicit the behavior of scientists1 with reference to scientific collections, their obstacles, beliefs, fears and greeds. We demonstrate that the conduct of scientists sometimes resembles a behavior present in social animals, known as territorialism2. Thus maybe some of the observed conducts could be justified by the soft politics of power,

For this purpose, we introduce Bourdieu's idea of hierarchy inside the sciences and Foucault's conceptions of power. Unhappily, we demonstrate that power conflicts are closer to us scientists than we thought or wished to be true. Therefore, this chapter intends to make

In behalf of our objective, it is important that the reader understand the meaning of a few biological contexts. That's why we clarify some aspects of ethology (the study of animal

1 We realize that this behavior must not and cannot be generalized to the entire group of professionals that work with scientifc collections. However, this chapter concerns behavior pertaining to a by no means negligible portion of this group. Therefore we apologize to those professional that feel unjustly

2 We take into consideration the diferent perspectives (sociological, geographical, political, etc.) of territory and territoriality. However, in this chapter, territorialism is quoted as a concept belonging to

natural to establish mutual cooperation between collections.

camouflaged in publications, that arises in the science fields.

the biological sciences, as explained in the following topic.

a reflection over the professional conduct dynamics in scientific collections.

involving collections are less well known.

and information is not fully disclosed.

**1. Introduction** 

affected by this exposure.

**Scientific Territorialism** 

*Universidade Federal da Paraíba,* 

Luana Poliseli and Martin Lindsey Christoffersen

Quinn, J. A. 1950. *Human Ecology*. New York: Prentice-Hall

