What changes have we made to our curriculum?

The following are examples of changes that I made to the Level 1 ‘Animal Behaviour’ curriculum after looking at the course through a decolonial lens:

1. Systematically audited researchers highlighted in lectures, and ensured gender balance and ethnic diversity. Presented a photograph and affiliations for each researcher that is highlighted to show diverse role models.

2. Presented a critical look at the history of animal behaviour. Talked about the political leanings of those who are considered ‘key’ figures (e.g. Konrad Lorenz was a Nazi, whereas Niko Tinbergen was imprisoned for two years for protesting against Nazis). Also went back beyond these textbook “founders” of the field, to earlier influential thinkers e.g. Charles Henry Turner, an African American who pioneered the study of animal behaviour in early 1900s but didn’t gain recognition (Lee 2020). Reflected on who has/hasn’t been appropriately recognised for their work and why.

3. Acknowledged the contributions of people whose influence on the study of animal behaviour have been largely overlooked, including Indigenous people whose traditional cultural knowledge has been extracted/exploited by Western researchers without appropriate credit.

4. Included examples of how increasing diversity of researchers in the field has led to important paradigm shifts e.g. female bird song (Haines et al 2020).

5. Considered how our approach to studying and interpreting animal behaviour is influenced – and limited – by our tendency to project human notions of behavioural norms onto animals. Noted that our human norms are ultimately Eurocentric norms. Presented as an example how theories of territoriality are founded upon human notions of property and ownership (Kamath & Wesner 2020). Challenged students to consider the degree to which our understanding of animal behaviour is biased by our views of how things ‘should’ be.

6. Developed a student-led, discussion-based approach to critically analysing ideas about the adaptive function of human nature that are rooted in sociobiology/evolutionary psychology. Through this, provided an opportunity for students to explore the politics of science and scientists themselves. This pedagogical approach is important in its own right, since active learning is evidenced to promote a more inclusive learning environment with better outcomes for students from diverse backgrounds.

Palaeobiology is delivered via two modules:- APS 269 Palaeobiology and APS 341 Evolution of Terrestrial Environments

Teaching on both has been altered in an attempt to address decolonisation of the curriculum.

1. Most countries now have strict laws regarding fossil collecting and ownership of the fossils recovered, to ensure that fossil heritage remains within the national collections of the country and open for scientific research by all. However, in many countries illegal collecting and export for sale to private collectors continues. Reassuringly most scientific journals now have policies that ban publications on specimens whose provenance cannot be proven and that are not adequately curated and available for scientific research (e.g. in private collections). This aspect concerning the legality of fossil collecting is now discussed in lectures, e.g. Myanmar amber.

2. Palaeontological research is usually not considered a priority research area due to its negligible economic impact. Consequently it is usually only practised to a high degree by wealthier nations, both in their home country and historically in their colonies. Consequently important research collections from ex-colonies have often ended up in national collections of ex-colonial powers with little or no reference to their heritage (the Elgin Marbles effect). Students are now encouraged in their project work to think about and acknowledge where and how the fossils were collected. Recognition of this problem was student-led.

3. Palaeontological research in developing nations (often ex-colonies) is often undertaken by an ‘ex-colonial, wealthy, elite’ (albeit they are usually citizens of these nations). These individuals can be lauded for their palaeontological research whilst the local research infrastructure can be inadvertently ignored. In these cases, I now try to outline the nature of the entire research hierarchy. For example, while explaining the exemplary research of the Leakey family on early human fossil remains from East Africa, as well as images of the Leakey family members, I also include images of local collectors and excavators whose work is often under-appreciated.

The following are examples of changes that I made to the Level 2 ‘Ecosystems in a Changing Global Environment’ curriculum after critically reviewing the course through a decolonial lens:

1. Systematically audited the authors presented, ensuring gender balance and ethnic diversity. Presented photograph and affiliations of each author / group leader to show diverse role models.

2. Framed climate change in terms of injustice, reminding students that it is primarily caused by the Global North but its impacts are felt most acutely in the Global South.

3. Noted the power imbalance created by Western-funded and Western-led research on ecosystems in the tropics, and the uncomfortable parallels with historical colonial relationships, especially when research questions are about how tropical ecosystems accentuate or mitigate climate change.

4. Highlighted examples where good practice in international collaborations strives for equality and recognition among partners (co-production, data ownership, co-authorship).

5. Showed that, although deforestation is currently fastest in the tropics, it was historically extensive across Eurasia and was accelerated globally by European colonisation of the Americas and Australia.

6. Recognised that the classic definitions of biomes and narratives about climatic controls over biome distributions are Eurocentric. These are problematic when applied to the tropical savanna biome.

7. Highlighted recent work led by African and Indian authors on the roles of fire and herbivores in controlling savanna distributions.

In APS 271 Conservation Principles, I cover global fisheries in broad terms, and have added references to equitability, and how to improve this:

1. The globalisation of fisheries is not equitable - Many fisheries products are exported from regions of low food security to regions of higher food security.

2. A more equitable distribution of global fisheries resources could tackle debilitating micronutrient deficiencies. Source: Hicks et al. Harnessing global fisheries to tackle micronutrient deficiencies. Nature 574, 95–98 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1592-6

3. Fisheries in richer nations are generally in reasonable shape, or are improving towards that. Can we learn from this and apply lessons to management in poorer regions, where stocks are currently in worse shape and tend to be declining, and where fish play such an important role in food security? In the kinds of fisheries that dominate in tropical and subtropical regeions, ecosystem-based management regulating overall fishing pressure is most likely to prove effective in ensuring sustainability. Source: Hilborn et al. (2020) Effective fisheries management instrumental in improving fish stock status. PNAS https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1909726116

4. In addition, in describing barriers to effective fisheries management I have removed a discussion of Hardin’s Tragedy of the Commons - it was a clumsy and unnecessary reference that did not add to understanding and (as I used to present it) was not subject to sufficient critical evaluation.

The following are examples of changes that I made to my lectures in the Level 2 ‘Evolutionary Biology’ course (APS220). My lectures cover topics such as sexual dimorphism and the evolution of sex chromosomes.

1. Systematically audited scientists highlighted and referenced in lectures, and ensured gender balance and ethnic diversity. Presented photographs and affiliations of researchers to show diverse role models.

2. Acknowledged the contributions of people whose work in the field has been largely overlooked. For example, I now include a slide discussing the work of Dr Nettie Stevens. She discovered sex chromosomes in 1905, however, at the time her contributions to the field were underplayed and despite her achievements she never held a formal university position. I include a photo of her and reflect on why she wasn’t appropriately recognised for her work at the time.

3. Presented a critical look at the history of research into sex differences. I avoid perpetuating the simplistic view that there are two binary male and female phenotypes and instead highlight the diversity of sexual phenotypes across the animal kingdom. I discuss how nomenclature (e.g sex chromosomes) can bias our research and the public perception of the biological basis of sex.

Stevens NM. 1905. Studies in spermatogenesis with especial reference to the ‘Accessory Chromosome’. Washington (DC): Carnegie Institution of Washington.

A number of changes have been made to APS 276 Symbiosis - details to follow soon.

1. Discussed the role of Carl Linnaeus in devising a system of biological classification (taxonomy) which included different 'varieties' (races) of humans, with Europeans described positively, but people from Asia, Africa and the Americas negatively. His system was arguably the basis for our current conceptualization of race, and was used to justify colonialism and other racist institutions and practices using pseudoscientific principles; i.e., it represents the orgins of scientific racism.

2. Discussed insect pest management and the promotion of agro-ecological insect management in Africa (e.g., push-pull systems). Discussed how this can involve imposing current northern/western ideas of sustainability (e.g., banning of synthetic pesticides) on subsistence farmers; discussed whether this is a form of neo-colonialism that ignores the needs and voices of these farmers.

3. Removed all named references to individual white, male researchers with a few exceptions (e.g. Carl Linnaeaus) to avoid perpetrating the idea that science has advanced due solely to the work of old white men.

The following changes have been implemented in the Biotech and Food curriculum (APS206):

The Golden Rice example was explicitly stated in the ‘Decolonising the curriculum’ booklet. The reality of this example is considerably more complex and nuanced than what is written there. Each year we have a discussion session on Golden Rice and we explored some of those issues. We also discuss pressure groups e.g. Greenpeace and whether one form of colonialism is being replaced by others. Other topics touch on how women have been treated when challenging established views (e.g. Rosi-Marshall)

We also talk a lot about the different needs of developed and developing countries and access to resources. I also speak about my own research in Nigeria and how we have moved to co-design with partners rather thinking we know the problems/have the solutions from a Western perspective.

See text above about Level 2 Palaeobiology

The following changes have been implemented in the Biology and Ethics curriculum (APS326):

I use examples of where groups have been mis-treated (e.g. Henrietta Lacks and HeLa cells, Tuskegee Study Group and syphilis, Venezualean kindreds and Huntingtons Disease with access to treatments). This extends to concepts of biopiracy and informed consent when bioprospecting. Who decides who benefits? Look at protocols, what they do and who drew them up.

With respect to individuals, I now explain the issues associated with Immanuel Kant and how his views were used to underpin scientific racism. This was something that I didn’t really understand before being prompted by this initiative.

The following changes were implemented in Conflict and Cooperation (APS357) in 2020:

1. The module includes lectures that trace the development of evolutionary ideas on competition and cooperation since Darwin. This includes coverage of the eugenicist movement (e.g. Francis Galton) and its subsequent adoption by race supremacists in Germany, South Africa, etc in the 20^th century.

2. When discussing the seminal contributions of Fisher and Haldane to evolutionary thought, I present a more rounded picture of them as scientists by describing their eugenicist leanings and other ideological perspectives that influenced their science.

3. Likewise with Bill Hamilton, the most important evolutionary biologist since Darwin, who also held eugenicist views. The struggles that Hamilton and George Price had with the implications of a gene-centric view of life, and particularly human behaviour, are portrayed brilliantly in a 2011 documentary by Adam Curtis about them and their science, woven into an account of colonialism and post-independence wars in East Africa: “All watched over by machines of loving grace, episode 3 – The monkey in the machine and the machine in the monkey”. A link to the documentary was provided via Blackboard with a recommendation to watch it given in lectures. The documentary includes some upsetting scenes and offensive views, so a warning was posted and edited clips that focused specifically on Hamilton and Price were also made available on Blackboard.

4. The general philosophy here is that the seminal contributions of key players in the development of a scientific field have to be recognised and described. However, it is also important to present a more complete account of them as people and to recognise that scientists do not operate in a vacuum, rather they both influence and are influenced by the society in which they work.

In APS 349 Conservation Issues and Management / APS 603 Global Conservation Issues, I expand on global fisheries, now placing these in the context of global sustainable development and food security, specifically:

1. I include this quote from José Graziano da Silva, FAO Director-General: “Since 1961 the annual global growth in fish consumption has been twice as high as population growth, demonstrating that the fisheries and aquaculture sector is crucial in meeting FAO’s goal of a world without hunger and malnutrition”

2. I discuss the dietary contribution of fish as a significant source of high-quality, easily digested animal proteins and especially in fighting micronutrient deficiencies, noting that fish proteins are essential in the diet of some densely populated countries where the total protein intake is low, and are particularly important in diets in Small Island Developing States (SIDS). Source: Garcia & Rosenberg (2010) Food security and marine capture fisheries: characteristics, trends, drivers and future perspectives Phil Trans R Soc B https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0171

3. I emphasise how much of the world’s fishing fleet is small and relatively low-tech, which limits the ability to preserve fish for longer-distance transport. In particular, most fish in developing countries is sold live or fresh, and the absence of refrigeration leads to high levels of food waste. source: FAO SOFIA 2018, http://www.fao.org/state-of-fisheries-aquaculture

In my lecture on Marine Protected Areas, I critically assess MPA targets and establishment, e.g.:

1. Setting arbitrary areal targets (such as, ‘30% of the sea should be protected’) can have potentially negative consequences for conservation. Source: Agardy et al. (2016) Aquatic Conservation https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.2675

2. What we think of as big empty areas of the sea can have huge cultural significance for other people. Drawing a line on a map to establish the 640,000km2 British Indian Ocean Territory MPA (https://www.protectedplanet.net/555512151) ignored the claims of the Chagos islanders who had been evicted from their homeland decades previously. Source: De Santo et al. (2011) Marine Policy https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2010.09.004

3. I also discuss how conservation management action is more feasible some countries than others, e.g. contrasting ‘easy’ conservation gains for sharks in Australia, South Africa, with countries where moderate capacity building is needed (e.g. Brazil, Argentina) and those where more substantial relief is required (e.g. Malaysia, PNG, Mozambique). Source: Davidson & Dulvy (2017) Nature Ecology & Evolution https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-016-0040

4. This issue of capacity is further discussed: “...continued global expansion of MPAs without adequate investment in human and financial capacity is likely to lead to sub-optimal conservation outcomes” Gill et al. (2017) Capacity shorfalls hinder the performance of marine protected areas globally. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/nature21708

5. I also consider benefits of closing the high seas to fishing in terms of equitability: “...closing the high seas could be catch-neutral while inequality in the distribution of fisheries benefits among the world's maritime countries could be reduced by 50%” Sumaila et al. (2015) Scientific Reports https://doi.org/10.1038/srep08481

The following are examples of changes that I made to the Level 3 ‘Global Change’ curriculum after critically reviewing the course through a decolonial lens:

1. Systematically audited the authors presented, ensuring gender balance and ethnic diversity. Presented photograph and affiliations of each author / group leader to show diverse role models.

2. Framed climate change as an injustice, reminding students that it is primarily caused by the globally wealthy, but its impacts are felt most acutely by those who are least responsible. Discussed climate justice, exploring the injustices surrounding climate change, and the equity that is required in mitigation and adaptation responses (IPCC 2019, p.55).

3. Explained the Doughnut Economics concept of ‘a safe and just space for humanity’, whereby the basic needs of all societies are met within the limits of Earth’s resources, and the extent to which this is possible using current practices (Raworth, 2012; O’Neill et al. 2018).

4. Discussed a number of alternatives proposed as start dates to the Anthropocene, and the implications of these for our understanding about the causes of global change, and responses to it. In addition to the Industrial Revolution, the Great Acceleration and evidence for an early Anthropocene (paleo-Anthropocene), I presented arguments for the European colonisation of the Americas as a start date (e.g. Lewis & Maslin 2015; Davis & Todd, 2016).

6. Detailed the historical links between the colonial exploitation of natural resources and of people via slavery, and the associated commodification of people and nature for profit. Explored ideas in the literature arguing that these exploitative practices represent a fundamental shift in the way people interacted with the natural world, and are the ultimate root cause of the Anthropocene (e.g. Yusoff, 2019).

7. Explored the economic associations between the Atlantic slave trade, the industrial revolution and capitalism, drawing on Inikori (2020) and Yusoff (2019) to draw further links between colonisation and the transitions in energy and economy responsible for accelerating fossil fuel consumption.

8. Contrasted prevailing Western cultural perspectives about the natural world with those of indigenous peoples, in the context of natural resource overexploitation. In Western cultures, land may be owned as private property, nature commodified and people psychologically isolated from nature. Conversely, many indigenous perspectives emphasise the interconnections of people and the natural world, averting exploitative practices (Medin & Bang, 2014; Kimmerer, 2020; McGregor et al. 2020).

9. Introduced the concept of Earth-centred law-making, such as the Rights of Nature, and the adoption of this approach in Bolivia and Ecuador (McGregor et al. 2020), as a mechanism for protecting natural resources from over-exploitation.

10. Explained how a globalised economic system and the unequal global distribution of wealth lead to power imbalances that operate through global trade. Showed how global supply chains may have environmental and social impacts embodied within them (Wiedmann & Lenzen, 2018). Discussed examples where CO2 emissions, land footprints and social impacts are embodied within traded food and goods (e.g. Yu et al., 2013; Hicks et al. 2019).

11. Discussed attribution of the responsibility for climate change based on consumption emissions (Hickel, 2020), and the author’s comparison of the global inequalities revealed by this approach with historical colonisation.

12. Explored the linkages between wealth, unhealthy eating and the climate impacts of food. Explained how emissions arise from the global food system, and the changes to eating and consumption patterns needed to make them more sustainable (e.g. Tilman & Clark, 2014; Springmann et al., 2016).

APS349 Conservation Issues and Management:

In the lecture on global restoration efforts I've added slides in on the potential for targets to be underpinned by neocolonialist tendencies, i.e. for the west to expect tropical nations to clean up our mess, and highlight how cheap it would be for us to instead restore forests on sheep farmland in the UK. Also, I now use the example of Angele Kavira Nzalamingi as a modern-day conservation champion for gorilla protection from the DRC.

Human Evolutionary Genetics (APS351)

The contributions of Francis Galton and, especially, Ronald Fisher were key to the emergence of quantitative genetics as a discipline. It is argued in the lectures that Fisher's classic 1918 paper on the resemblance between relatives is the most important evolutionary genetics paper of the 20th century and that it underpins disciplines such as animal and plant breeding and genomic medicine. However, both Galton and Fisher were key figures in the eugenics movement and they probably believed that some populations were 'superior' to others, and that these differences would have a genetic basis. One of the key messages in the module, which has emerged in the genomics era, is that most human genetic variation is found within rather than between populations, and that all contemporary populations are founded by multiple migration events without population replacement, such that the concept of races or pure populations is erroneous.

In recent years, organisations that have previously honoured Galton and Fisher have begun to remove their names from buildings, prizes etc. In the module I have now included a mini-lecture which explains why this is happening, and why the work of Galton and Fisher can be regarded as seminal, but some of their views were nonetheless wrong and are not evidenced by the subsequent science. I have provided appropriate journal articles and explanatory documents, from both proponents and critics of these recent name changes.

I have run L3 dissertations to further critically assess the pros and cons of area-based conservation targets:

• These consider in particular issues like the so-called ‘Global Ocean Grab’ (https://www.tni.org/en/publication/the-global-ocean-grab-a-primer).

• They also consider this critique from political ecologists of concepts of ‘Protecting 30% of the Planet for Nature’, https://openlettertowaldronetal.wordpress.com, specifically in the context of MPA planning.

• The aim is to think about who benefits (and who does not) from large-scale MPA designations.

As with L3 Dissertations above, I am running MSc Literature Reviews to further critically assess the pros and cons of area-based conservation targets - see that section for full details.

My lab journal club was an opportunity to research the history of our field and undertake a critical assessment of biases. As a research group, we set aside 2 months to discuss Sex Itself, a history of sex and reproduction, where we read a chapter a week.

Richardson SS. 2014. Sex Itself: The Search for Male and Female in the Human Genome, 1–320.