Personal Ethics in Interpretation
When you interpret nature for an audience, you are provided with an opportunity to helm not only their education but their sense of place and passion for the natural world (Beck et al., 2018c). Here, the combination of your knowledge, ethics, passion, and personality dictates your success in deepening your audiences’ understanding of the natural world and inspiring their appreciation of nature and willingness for environmental protection (Beck et al., 2018b). Knowledge provides credibility and is the basis for programming, and passion and personality work together to fuel the appeal and effectiveness of programs (Beck et al., 2018b). An interpreter’s personal ethics, however, is particularly important as it is what guides the direction and outcome of programs.
An interpreter’s personal ethics is apparent in all aspects of programming. When I think about the ethics surrounding my development as an interpreter, words such as amiability, honesty, open-mindedness, sensitivity, compassion, authenticity, patience, and reliability come to mind. These ethics appear in various parts of program development and delivery.
At the most fundamental level, interpreters must be empathetic and responsive to their audiences’ needs. Understanding how to account for Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is an essential aspect of facilitating effective and safe programming (Beck et al., 2018). You must ensure that your audience is comfortable before anything else. Do they have to go to the washroom? Are they straining their eyes by looking into the sun? Are they getting bitten by bugs? Do they feel safe? These are some examples of questions you must consider before and during your program's delivery. Doing so makes it easier for your audience to appreciate your program by limiting their distractions from discomfort. To do this effectively, you must constantly be aware of your audiences’ comfort by harbouring a level of empathetic sensitivity.
There is something so facilitating about interpreting nature while immersed in nature. I think a large part of this has to do with the fact that we are a part of nature. So, in a way, we are facilitating connections between two things that are already innately connected. As nature interpreters, our role goes beyond that of a teacher due to our ability to inspire hearts as well as minds (Beck et al., 2018d). With this, nature interpretation has the power to encourage individuals to look at the world through a new lens. I believe this is enabled through the ability of effective nature interpretation to provide audiences with profound multisensory experiences (Beck et al., 2018a). What’s better than immersing yourself in serene and wonderous natural landscapes, seeing the plants and wildlife, listening to the music, or biophony, of nature, smelling the sap and wildflowers, and feeling the breeze or sun against your skin, all while learning about the history or science behind elements of your experience (Beck et al., 2018a; Grey et al., 2001)? Fully immersive natural experiences like this appeal to so many parts of your brain and can fully captivate your senses in a way that makes you feel small and insignificant. I’m sure many of us have experienced this feeling when in nature; I know I have.
As nature interpreters, I believe that we have a duty to encourage our audience to connect with the land so that they develop a sense of care and responsibility towards it (Rodenburg, 2019; Beck et al., 2018d). Nature interpretation helps develop our audience’s ethical sense of place in the world as well as encourages them to respect the animals and plants that we share the world with (Beck et al., 2018d). My background in environmental ethics and historical human-nature relationships led me to believe in the ever-growing importance of honest and progressive nature interpretation. Unfortunately, developing relationships between humans and nature is often impeded by deeply ingrained assumptions of human ascendency and widespread consumer-facilitated anthropocentrism. The consequences of this are twofold. Firstly, we must be wary of biased scientific research that may support sacrificing ecological sustainability for economic growth. Thus, substantiating the need for well-informed and honest interpretive programs (Beck et al., 2018e). Secondly, society’s deeply ingrained anthropocentrism tends to limit the effectiveness of interpretive programs that are aimed at ecocentric or biocentric worldviews, for example. In these cases, we must structure our programs to appeal to anthropocentric worldviews by acknowledging the value of nature to humans. Such value may be derived through aesthetic, aural, climate, or ecosystemic processes, to name a few.
You may ask, “why does it matter? It’s not our duty as nature interpreters to make people care.” However, I believe that as nature interpreters, we also have responsibilities as environmental stewards (Beck et al., 2018b; Beck et al., 2018d). Hence, I think that it is our responsibility as environmental stewards to encourage people to open their minds to different and potentially more ecologically sustainable worldviews and perspectives. In doing so, we must also be open-minded in understanding that not everyone harbours the same worldview. We must be able to approach topics from the different perspectives of various worldviews, appealing to human-centric mindsets in addition to biocentric or eco-centric ideologies. Therefore, we must be open-minded and sensitive in our interpretative programming in addition to honest and progressive.
Of course, there are additional perspectives that we must also consider, including those we carry in our invisible backpacks (McIntosh, 1989). Being sensitive to our audiences’ potential limitations, experiences, or existing ideologies allows for more effective programming and enriching experiences. This idea also applies to the accessibility of programs. As interpreters, we are responsible for continuing to increase the accessibility of programs and natural spaces so that everyone can enjoy them (Beck et al., 2018f).
Beck, L., Cable, T. T., & Knudson, D. M. (2018a). Chapter 6: How people learn. In Interpreting culture and natural heritage for a better world (1st ed., pp. 105-126). Sagamore Venture.
Beck, L., Cable, T. T., & Knudson, D. M. (2018b). Chapter 5: Guiding principles of interpretation. In Interpreting culture and natural heritage for a better world (1st ed., pp. 81-104). Sagamore Venture.
Beck, L., Cable, T. T., & Knudson, D. M. (2018c). Chapter 1: What is interpretation? In Interpreting culture and natural heritage for a better world (1st ed., pp. 3-16). Sagamore Venture.
Beck, L., Cable, T. T., & Knudson, D. M. (2018d). Chapter 3: Values to individuals and society. In Interpreting culture and natural heritage for a better world (1st ed., pp. 39-58). Sagamore Venture.
Beck, L., Cable, T. T., & Knudson, D. M. (2018e). Chapter 15: Interpreting history. In Interpreting culture and natural heritage for a better world (1st ed., pp. 325-347). Sagamore Venture.
Beck, L., Cable, T. T., & Knudson, D. M. (2018f). Chapter 7: Serving diverse audience. In Interpreting culture and natural heritage for a better world (1st ed., pp. 127-164). Sagamore Venture.
Gray, P. M., Krause, B., Atema, J., Payne, R., Krumhansl, C., & Baptista, L. (2001). The Music of Nature and the Nature of Music. Science, 291(5501), 52. https://link-gale-com.subzero.lib.uoguelph.ca/apps/doc/A69270354/AONE?u=guel77241&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid
McIntosh, P. (1989). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. Peace and Freedom, 10-12.
Rodenburg, J. (2019, June 17). Why environmental educators shouldn’t give up hope. Clearing. https://clearingmagazine.org/archives/14300