ENVS 196S: Advanced Topics in Climate Change Science & Policy

This Senior Seminar (5 credits) focuses on soil quality and food security at regional and global scales. This is an intensive reading, discussion, and writing course. Students are expected to search for relevant literature, read a selective set of key articles/books, participate in discussions, choose a focal topic of their own, and write a comprehensive senior paper about soil quality/food security. Students may draw quantitative information from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations and develop a synthesis on a particular topic of their own choice. Sample topics may include: (1) soil degradation and grain production in a certain region/country; (2) the influence of global environmental change on soil quality and food production; (3) impacts of global warming on food security; and (4) an analysis of world commodity market, food distribution, and globalization.

Each student will be evaluated by his or her performance on participation (15%), leading discussion (15%), presentation (20%), and a synthesis/research paper (50%).

Course Introduction, and scoping main issues of the course topics—Cheng leads the discussion

UN FAO, 2010. Feed the World in 2050. World Summit on Food Security, Rome 16–18 November 2009.

Stocking, M.A., 2003. Tropical soils and food security: The next 50 years. Science 302, 1356-1359.

Serageldin, I., 1999. Biotechnology and food security in the 21st century. Science 285, 387-389.

Lobell, D.B., Burke, M.B., Tebaldi, C., Mastrandrea, M.D., Falcon, W.P., Naylor, R.L., 2008. Prioritizing climate change adaptation needs for food security in 2030. Science 319, 607-610.

Comments to the Special Issue of Feb 12, 2010—Science 328, 9 APRIL 2010, 169-173

Week 2 (April 11): Choose your partner; Soil quality—Definition, data, and connections to food security—Cheng leads the discussion

Wiebe, Keith, 2003. Linking Land Quality, Agricultural Productivity, and Food Security.

U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Economic Report No. 823.

Van Oost, K., Quine, T.A., Govers, G., De Gryze, S., Six, J., Harden, J.W., Ritchie, J.C., McCarty, G.W., Heckrath, G., Kosmas, C., Giraldez, J.V., da Silva, J.R.M., Merckx, R., 2007. The impact of agricultural soil erosion on the global carbon cycle. Science 318, 626-629.

Week 3 (April 18): Present two topics and their outlines of your research paper from each group of two students, then choose one of the topics for your research paper. Two students in each pair are expected to present the topics and the outlines together, but write their papers individually.

(Each student group is given the opportunity to lead a discussion session on the chosen topic of their research paper. Readings for the discussion session should be emailed to everyone at least one week before the time of the discussion.)

Week 10 (June 6): Student presentation (Groups 3 & 4) (Final version of the paper due)

Each group of two students is required to present (1) two research topics and their outlines for the research paper on April 18, and (2) results found in their research paper on May 30 and June 6. Students will work individually and in pairs during the quarter to study the issues of their choice and produce Powerpoint presentations that aims to inform a general audience about these issues and to suggest possible strategies for resolving this issue. On April 18, each group/pair will give two brief (~10 min each) presentations on their project proposal in order to get feedback from instructors and peers. On May 30 and June 6, students will give presentations on the results of their projects. Presentations will be 20 minutes per student (i.e. 40 min. per groups of two) plus 5 minutes for questions and discussions. Note that given the time restrictions students will not be able to present all the information in their paper but the group will need to work together towards and integrated presentation. Presentations will be graded by the instructor and the peers. Grading will be based on overall team content of presentation; content of individual sections; overall format, length, and clarity of presentation; individual speaking skills; and cooperation and organization of group during the project.

Students may send their Powerpoint/PDF files to the instructor (wxcheng@ucsc.edu) if it is smaller than 5 megabytes, or bring their Powerpoint files on memory stick, or their own computer. Please be award of the possible incompatibility issues between PCs and Macs. Students are required to give a copy of their Powerpoint presentation to the instructor.

Each student will individually write a paper on a certain aspect of the group topic. The paper should provide a critical analysis of a specific issue. The paper should include extensive research, be well-organized, and be proofread. The paper should include the following sections:

1. A 1-2 pages general introduction to the problem being addressed to provide a context for your paper.

2. A paragraph that clearly states the goal of this paper and lays out your “roadmap” for the paper. In other words, what question are you addressing and how is your paper structured to address this question?

3. 8-12 pages presenting the research you have done on your topic in an organized manner.

4. 1-2 page conclusion section in which you reiterate the 3-4 specific conclusions that stem directly from the research you present

5. A cover letter listing specific points on which you would like feedback and what you think are the strengths and weaknesses of your papers.

The paper should have page numbers and should be double spaced. Be sure to spell-check and proofread your paper, and include a list of references cited.

Revised paper: The revised paper in its final form is due at 5:00 pm on June 6, and should be 15-20 pages double spaced, plus a cover sheet explaining how reviewers’ comments were addressed. The paper should include the same sections as above and be substantially revised to incorporate reviewer comments. In other words, based on your research what is the answer to your initial question? Papers will be graded on thoroughness of research, organization, writing style, and critical analysis, as well as addressing reviewers’ comments on the final paper.

Process - Developing research papers in Environmental Studies follows an iterative process.

Critical Analysis – The research paper requires interpreting data from a range of sources collected using differing methodologies. The information must be compared, weighed and interpreted. Just because a book or article is published does not mean that its conclusions are well supported. Any conclusions drawn in the paper must be substantiated by the material presented whether it is primary data or a review paper. It is always important to distinguish between the opinions of others, your conclusions based on the information presented, and your speculations and opinions.

Style - Good organization and writing style is essential to help the reader understand your main points. Start with an outline and use it to organize your ideas. Once you have done most of your research, you may write it in reverse sequence. In other words, first think about your conclusions; then consider the information needed to support those conclusions; then write an introduction that gives your reader only the relevant background information to the rest of your paper. In short, make sure there is coherence between the different sections of your paper. Do not introduce new topics in the conclusion.

Citing and Plagiarism - Identifying ideas or quoting passages to strengthen arguments and to acknowledge sources is essential and is the hallmark of scholarly work. Any writing which is directly copied or any idea not your own must be identified and cited. Not to do this is plagiarism, and is unethical. Essentially this is how scientific and scholarly writing differs from journalism: sources must always be disclosed for the purpose of verification. Acknowledgments must also be made for maps, tables, figures, and text, if they are copied. See final page of this handout for citation format guidelines.

Scholarly (peer-reviewed) journal articles – Most researchers publish their work in journals where the articles are reviewed by their peers. This review provides a certain degree of quality control for their work. Nonetheless, readers still need to review the work thoughtfully to determine if they agree with conclusions and supporting evidence. A wide range of journal databases available to UC faculty and students are listed at http://library.ucsc.edu/Zope/eresources/bytool/ArticleDatabases. Many are now available electronically, making access even easier.

Popular articles – Popular magazines publish articles written by professional writers (rather than experts in a particular field) and are written for the lay reader. They are not generally used as references for research papers. See http://library.ucsc.edu/ref/howto/popularscholarly.html for a discussion of popular vs. scholarly articles.

Books – Books are published by many publishing companies for a wide range of audiences. They vary a great deal in the degree and type of review. Most books for academic audiences are peer reviewed. The UCSC book holdings (cruzcat) and the University of California holdings (melvyl) are accessible through the UCSC library web site http://library.ucsc.edu/. Books at other UC campuses can be requested through Interlibrary loan, but this requires allowing sufficient time (at least a week) to get these sources. It can be harder to find books on a specific topic as the search engines only search words in titles rather than in abstracts.

Government documents – All government documents owned by UCSC can be found using Cruzcat. For some regional issues you may need to contact specific government agencies to determine where you can access specific documents, such as Environmental Impact Statements.

Internet – The internet may be the only source of information, but should not be the primary source of support for papers. Be critical of sources found on the Internet. Think about who produced the information, their credentials, and their agenda. Since there is no overall quality control it is up to you to check the reliability of the information and whether or not it is refereed. The internet is also problematic because it is constantly changing, so a source you cite may not be there if a reader wants to corroborate your source. If you end up using material from the Internet it needs to be cited in your bibliography, including the url, title, author, date posted, and date accessed. Give preference to refereed publications such as books and journal articles rather than those found on the Web.

Personal interviews – Personal interviews may provide key information on some environmental issues, but should be used judiciously to answer questions that cannot be answered by published material. Also, as discussed earlier in the quarter, when approaching individuals be well organized, polite, and respectful of their time and the favor they are doing for you.

2. Your points are much stronger if you back them up with studies illustrating or expert opinion supporting them.

Ex.: Low seed dispersal commonly limits tropical forest recovery (Cubiña and Aide 1994, Holl et al. 2000).

Ex.: Holl and Howarth (2000) report that restoration costs are often underestimated.

Ex: Development projects at UCSC often poorly mitigate for cumulative impacts (K. Holl, UCSC professor, pers. comm.).

Ex: Efforts to control pike in Lake Davis have been unsuccessful (SLDTF 2000).

Holl, K. D., M. E. Loik, E. H. V. Lin, and I. A. Samuels. 2000. Restoration of tropical rain forest in

Gauch, H. G. Jr. 1982. Multivariate analysis in community ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Bradshaw, A. D. 1987. Restoration: an acid test for ecology. Pages 23-29 in W. R. I. Jordan, M. Gilpin, and J. D. Aber (eds) Restoration Ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Pennington, T. D. and E. C. M. Fernandes (eds). 1998. The genus Inga. Continental Printing, Belgium.

Knox, R. 1997. Please don’t dial and drive, study suggests. Boston Globe, 13 February 1997: A1, A17.

Save Lake Davis Task Force (SLDTF).[1] 2000.[2] Managing northern pike at Lake Davis: a plan for Y2000.

Retrieved January 5, 2004[3] from the California Department of Fish and Game web site <www.dfg.ca.gov/northernpike/mgpike.htm >.

Acknowledgement: Most of the instructions about writing papers given above are taken from Professor Karen Holl’s ENVS 190 syllabus previously provided to students in her class.

[1]If there is no author you can list a document as anonymous, but, in general, if there is no author listed with a document then the credibility of the web site should be considered. If possible, find a more reliable reference.

[2]If there is no date indicating when the web page was posted then put n.d. where the date should go. But, be careful that the information is not outdated.

[3]It is standard practice to include the access date for web pages since they may change