Over the past few years I have inhabited a very interesting but conflicting role of both a tourism development consultant (working mostly on USAID-funded projects) and critical scholar in the field of political ecology, meaning that I am actively writing about and critiquing the notion of "development" itself and the claims that tourism is a panacea to achieving sustainable development aims--curing poverty, providing alternative livelihoods, protecting biodiversity, etc. I have loved being in this space because it has challenged me to think critically about my work and become a better consultant, but I have also been frustrated because some of what I myself have learned about and written in the academic world I find difficult to apply in practice.

I enjoy very much inhabiting this scholar/consultant space in bringing regenerative principles into practice on the ground, but I am constantly feeling this internal conflict. For example, on the one hand I have engaged deeply in the regenerative tourism space, learning its principles, understanding the theory, writing white papers and articles seeking to apply it in practice. But then I put on my consulting hat and try to tell myself -- we need to center in place, prioritize community needs, see the whole system, etc but our time and budget does not allow for that. More recently in my work in Galapagos inhabiting the consultant/scholar role has meant supporting public institutions to try and enact a regenerative shift in tourism in Galapagos, but as I actually study the work that I myself am doing with these institutions with my political ecology hat on I see that this isn't just all positive, win-win solutions. For example, RT questions the "growth-based paradigm" of tourism, so part of my early role here was helping the National Park advocate for increasing the entrance fee for the first time in 26 years in hopes of stabilizing tourism numbers and assist them in creating a "zero growth tourism strategy" for the islands in response to UNESCO concerns. But through my research I am seeing all of the incredibly negative economic and livelihood impacts that these decisions are having in the GNPs efforts to shift to a "regenerative" tourism model, and also how the term regenerative itself is being co-opted by a multitude of actors because it is the next trendy thing (and it was a term that I played a huge role in bringing to the island through my work with these institutions, organizing a big workshop last year, etc). So I guess this role has enabled me to see that nothing, not even a "regenerative paradigm shift", is positive and perfect -- trade-offs must be negotiated and acknowledged, and I see my own evolution as being an individual capable of better helping others navigate this reality.

As a scholar/practitioner I have been personally frustrated by the lack of practical, clear guidance on applying regenerative principles in everyday work. Sometimes I ask myself -- if I, with the luxury of doing a PhD and having all this time to read and digest the scholarship, cannot practically implement these principles in my work as a consultant then how are others with less time/resources going to do so? At least in the regenerative tourism space, I feel there are a lot of "gatekeepers" of this terminology and its usage -- people who say regeneration can never be a framework or step-by-step guide, that each solution is unique to place, that there are no certifications or checklists etc, but then get annoyed and call out everyone for misusing/greenwashing the term and not understanding its deep-rooted meaning. I feel like saying... duh. Not everyone has the privilege to read academic articles all day, so what is the solution here? I would like to find a way during this course to understand regeneration on a very deep and fundamental/theoretical level, but also keep in the back of my mind the frustrations I have felt as a practitioner and understand how I can use these principles in a practical, every-day way while also sharing this knowledge with others.

In my PhD I have been doing a lot of 3D mapping workshops with different stakeholders to engage in systems thinking. I have really loved this work because it has brought this lofty/theoretical principle of "living systems thinking" into something tangible and real -- people play with Playdough and silly string to create a system and then are amazed when they realize things about it they didn't know before. I would love to engage more deeply with this line of thinking and the practice that surrounds it, getting better at simple yet often challenging skills like listening and empathy to more immediately understand and feel the system that I am working with. Going back to my point above, I'd love to learn more practical ways of engaging with these skills to take them forward in my work.

I'm doing this course for two reasons. One, I eventually have to write a 80K+ word thesis that draws heavily from regenerative theory, systems thinking, sustainability, limits to growth etc and I would love to engage with others in the field to learn more about these principles and the theory behind them. The second reason is that I want to apply these principles in my every day practice as a consultant, and to become a better facilitator in future workshops I run or assessments I conduct.

Lots of studying! I have been very fortunate to have received multiple scholarships to conduct independent research, complete two Masters, and begin a PhD. I feel extremely lucky to have had this opportunity, but I also made a lot of sacrifices in that period by deciding to work part-time for the past 5 years as a consultant, both to make ends meet but also because I didn't like fully inhabiting either space, of academia disconnected from practice or practice disconnected from critical research of said practice. I have also invested a lot in my own personal network, talking a lot with the most well-known "regenerative tourism" scholars to explore their worldview and perspectives on the research I am doing, which has been helpful for in finding my own path in this space.

I studied international affairs with a focus on international environmental studies/management for my bachelors and this led me down the path of trying to merge my interests in marine conservation and international diplomacy/politics. Tourism became a central avenue for exploring this interest and for many years I read a lot of traditional managerial focused literature which spoke in very positivist, action oriented terms -- influencing my own work as a consultant. As I started my masters I became more interested in political ecology literature and thinkers like Fletcher, Buscher, Mowforth and Munt, etc who heavily critiqued the purpose of tourism and argued that it was often a problem rather than solution. Critical development scholarship furthered that space, particuarly the writings of Arturo Escobar, and the exploration of the concept of buen vivir or good living here in Latin America. Books like Robin Wall Kimmerer's Braiding Sweetgrass have also been very influential in going beyond the Western conceptualizations of what regeneration means, going back to the original understanding of seeing humans and nature as one.

I believe that humans and nature are completely interconnected and interdependent, and the more we do to remove these connections whether through good intentions--fortress-style conservation-- or bad--destructive development--the worse the outcomes for both parties. I see this very clearly in the Galapagos where despite living in a national park with 97% of nature protected, the majority of residents rarely go to the beach or see the other islands or snorkel due to time and resource constraints, and the heavy restrictions that the national park places on interactions with natural areas. Humans need nature, but nature also needs humans: we have shaped and changed the natural world for the past 10,000 years at least and the idea that just leaving the "pristine" places remain "untouched" by human hands is flawed.