The Effects of Neo-Conservatism on Park Science, Management, and Administration: Examples and a Discussion

politics; often politics exercises its power not on but through dominant institutional structures, priorities, and practices. Almost invisibly, this latter type of influence implicitly and systematically legitimizes hegemonic institutions and practices, making it difficult for the status quo to be questioned or changed (Harding 1992). Yet it seems difficult for park managers and scientists to acknowledge that resource management issues are inherently based on values, and are thus both directly and indirectly influenced by political ideologies (McCool and Stankey 2003; Rohde 2004). The purpose of this paper is to challenge park scientists, managers, and administrators to acknowledge the influence of political ideology on park issues. More specifically, I wish to describe and analyze the impact of one particular political ideology—neo-conservatism —on protected areas. After defining and reviewing the importance of neo-conservative thought in contemporary Western nations, I identify common policies and practices of neo-conservatives, focusing on economic policies associated with fiscal conservatism, and their impact on park planning and management. Examples from Ontario, British Columbia, New Zealand, and the United States are used to illuminate how fiscally conservative policies affect park research, management, and administration. Finally, the shared histories and characteristics of these case studies are reviewed.