ENVX Symposium Blog

From left to right: Alana Rader, Liz Safran, Joaquin Sandoval, Violet Wojno, Jessica Kleiss, Laura Mundt, Jim ProctorThe environmental sector is subject to inter-sphere disagreement on approaching the environmental crisis, and external dismissals of environmental efforts as a whole. I’ve learned that engaging across these different priorities poses challenges, but remains a vital step towards progress. The Environmental Studies program at Lewis & Clark prioritizes listening and conversational skills as tools to combat the challenge, and has sparked my passion for civil engagement and dialogue across difference. For the last year, I’ve materialized and expanded upon this passion through our annual, student-run symposium.

Our week of events caters to a new theme each year, often related to environmental topics on the minds of our students. In light of the 2024 election, when an already split country was driven further against each other through partisan distinction, we wanted to pursue a theme that addressed that divide. We crafted and announced the theme of Common Ground: How We Can Engage Across Difference With a Shared Love of Land. With this theme, we approached controversial agricultural policies by exercising structured dialogue and mindful engagement across difference.

In spring of 2024, we constituted ‘working groups’ for the forestry, cropland agriculture, and livestock agriculture sectors that would explore the different perspectives within them. The working group format was completely experimental in comparison to past ENVX panels and discussions. These three groups showcased on- and off-campus participants, all of whom had a different definition of their stake in the group’s sector. For instance, our cropland agriculture group hosted multigenerational farmers, our dining hall’s food supply manager, and the director of a food security nonprofit, among others. The big difference between these groups and past panels was their preliminary engagement in the spring and early fall. The working groups participated in seven hours of structured dialogue, with only the last hour being publicly presented to the school. Community Dialogues was a huge help in that process, by helping us script the meetings and offering their trained student practitioners to facilitate. Despite the experimental risk, the working group format proved to be a fruitful experience of transformed perspectives and productive policy discussion. The cropland group discussed the proposed prohibition of pollinator-harming pesticide use, the livestock folks analyzed California’s Prop. 12, and our forestry group debated how to consider fire and climate changes with future management of the Mt. Hood National Forest.

A collection of statements made by our working group members

“The thing I have learned is that instead of focusing on a knowledge gap, we should be focusing on a communication gap.”

“Part of the solution is having real exchanges with people that do have some personal experience.”

“It was really nice to be able to have civil conversations … and for me to be able to share about agriculture and our practices.”

“We have to work together to find common ground … and I hope that we keep having these discussions … believe me that we as a human race can do something great on this planet ”

“I think that land is a way that connects us, whether we know it or not.”

“As a farmer, I feel heard. I just wish I could do this all the time.”

On Monday, several engagement organizations were represented, and given the space to present on their unique approach to engagement. Joining us was Healthy Democracy, Oregon Humanities, Oregon’s Kitchen Table, Lewis & Clark College’s Community Dialogues. The event didn’t stop there. The audience broke out into four groups, each of which took part in an engagement workshop and exercise led by the respective organizations. Upon reconvening, the students reflected on their experience to the entire room. This workshop gave students and attendees the opportunity to learn from experts of dialogue, and experience the uncomfortable, often rewarding feelings that come with engagement. We appreciate those organizations, all of whom have been reliable partners to the Environmental Studies program, for promoting the spirit of civil discourse.

We closed our week by focusing on labor and farmworker protection policy. Cynthia Ramirez of Pineros y Campesinos Unidos de Noreste (PCUN), and Jenny Dressler of Oregon Farm Bureau (OFB) joined us to discuss relevant policy, and engagement norms in the lobbying process. Their conversation was moderated by Leah Gilbert of the Political Science department. This event departed from the group conversation style of the working groups, to an intimate conversation between organizations with often polarized policy priorities. Despite their differences, both speakers were mindful of each other’s thoughts and often reached places of agreement in answering the questions that Professor Gilbert put forth.

I truly believe that we all have something in common, and collectively hope for the improvement of our community, nation, and world. But, there are a multitude of approaches towards improvement, and it’s naive of us to discount anybody else’s thoughts by refusing to engage with them. My personal goal with the symposium was to diversify the perspectives of our agriculture partners and students, while providing a model of engagement across difference for our campus. The livestock group executed my vision beyond expectation: A vegan animal law professor was immersed in productive engagement with a cattle rancher from red-dominated, Eastern Oregon. They collaborated openly, and while their work and cultural spaces were contrasting, they shared a love for animals. Creating a space that allowed these folks to learn about each other and respond to the same questions, however uncomfortable it may be, exposed the common ground between them. I watched as the discovery of shared humanness compounded into productive engagement about the sector that they’re invested in. Sometimes, all it takes is a conversation to realize that ‘the other side’ isn’t the thing that we construct in our minds.

Chairing the symposium has given me a flood of experience, and reminded me daily of the importance of staying curious and open to collaboration. I depart from my time with the symposium feeling inspired. This framework of engagement can be applicable to all topics, and there is much to be gained by talking with the people that the media, your culture, and your partisan affiliation has urged you to dismiss. I encourage you to pursue those conversations. When we collectively close ourselves off from those that think differently than us, we do a disservice to our own perspective and society’s continuous effort towards the ‘greater good’. Join me, in seeking, nurturing, and promoting the spirit of Common Ground.

Thank you to Violet Wojno, Co-chair, for being an amazing partner throughout this symposium project. Thank you to Jim Proctor, who has been an incredible mentor to me through the entire process, all while giving us students the space to express our values and vision for ENVX. Thank you to Laura Mundt, who is a true expert at what she does, which proved indispensable to our planning efforts throughout the fall. Our student committee consisted of Ella Bloch, Emilie Thoreson, and Marly Moore. We were also supported by several student volunteers, and the rest of the ENVS Faculty. Each student and faculty’s continued commitment to this symposium was vital to it materializing, and I’m so grateful for their help.