Could you describe how and why you became professionally involved in peacebuilding work?

Growing up in Pakistan, I was acutely aware of constant conflict with our neighbouring countries – particularly India. The persistent stress of border clashes and the inertia on both sides to politically resolve their post-colonial tensions led me to focus on novel ways to resolve the territorial disputes in the region and beyond. Much of my research on conflicts between mining companies and communities (such as the ongoing struggles against strip-coal mining in Appalachia) has straddled the negotiating space between industries and communities. This stems from my experiences of working for a major multinational corporation (General Electric) during a time of intense environmental conflict between the company and the community in New York, where they had a legacy of chemical contamination of the Hudson River. Trained as a chemist in my undergraduate degree, I was fascinated by the complexity of products that GE manufactured and the elements which went into their manufacturing but also which ended up in ecological systems where the company operated. From that experience, I embarked on an academic career which built upon the paradigm of ‘industrial ecology’, which considers modern technological activity as an inextricable part of the ecosystem. I have thus always thought of peacebuilding at multiple scales: between companies and communities, between science and society and between nation-states.

Your work in peacebuilding is most closely associated with conflict resolution in situations where the natural environment is under threat. This book explores how cultural heritage can advance peacebuilding efforts. What do you see as the parallels between natural heritage and cultural heritage in this regard? What do you see as the biggest differences?

Most human societies have some cultural connectivity with natural systems. Natural heritage anchors cultures to particular places and is often grounded in community survival. Cultures are dynamic and are not inherently positive by any means. There is considerable negativity in many cultures that makes them exclusive and not conducive to peacebuilding. This has been the case with many cultures that are dominated by particular literalist adherence to ancient religious scriptures. Religions can also change but are more inertial. I have found this to be the case within the Islamic tradition which I have grown up with.