At the moment, my research interests are both eclectic and broadly defined.  Previously, I looked at the production of the historical and cultural landscape of Great Smoky Mountains National Park, however, in an effort to make stronger connections with policymaking today, I have gravitated towards political ecology, using it as a theoretical prism through which to examine how decisions are made with respect to environmental and historical conservation practices in national parks more generally.  Specifically, my aim is to understand how management gets done, for lack of a better expression, and the degree to which aesthetic, ecological, and social considerations factor into the setting of policy.  A more succinct way of putting this is: do management practices focus on aesthetic concerns at the expense of ecological health of parks; or has there been a shift in emphasis such that questions over whether the parks look pleasing to visitors have become less of a concern to make room for management rooted in scientific principles; or is there some unwieldy combination of priorities at work that we’ll never fully disentangle?  Since I am without a firm answer right now, I will speculate the latter is closest to the mark, as by this point we are all pretty much aware that the scientific is the aesthetic is the cultural – or something like that.