33 Revisiting Environment & natural resources in the Dewey Decimal Classification

As I have said before, there are complications with the Dewey classification of Environment and Natural resources. As recounted in a previous post (here!), DDC20 had 333 Land economics, 333.7-.9 Natural resources and energy, whereas DDC22 calls it  333 Economics of land and energy, 333.7-.9 as in dc20), and there are sub-classes individually for forest land, wetland, recreational and wilderness areas, biological resources and organisms, and so on.

One of the complications is Dewey’s well-intentioned provision of further sub-numbers to deal with specific aspects of each topic under 333.7-.9 Natural resources and energy. These aspects are introduced by digit 1 after the main number, giving ’11 for “Resources, Reserves” (e.g. 333.75’11 Forest lands-reserves), ’12 for “Requirements”, ’13 for “Consumption” (further subdivided into ‘137 for “Abuse and wastage”), ’14 for “Environment impact studies”, ’15-17 for “Management and control”, ’16 for “Conservation and protection”, and ’17 for “Control of usage”. After experimenting with these for years, I have come to the conclusion that they are, unfortunately, more or less useless for the following reasons.

Firstly, very few books on natural resources can avoid dealing with a number of these aspects simultaneously. I mean, can you think of writing about, say, “Conservation & protection”, without first describing the “Use and abuse” of the resources? And when you do that, can you really avoid talking about the rising “Demand” or “Requirements”? And the shrinking “Resources” or “Reserves”? I did try using these sub-topics but found that the end result was a senseless dispersal of my little collection. Now that I am re-doing the shelfing (not, I hope, the shelving!) of my collection, I have decided to just put general works under the main heading 333.7, covering all environment and natural resources, followed by 333.73, 333.74, 333.75, etc. for each specific type of resource.

What is this “dispersal” I am talking about? Let us take 333.75 Forest lands, for example. The natural sequence would be to arrange by geography, so forests of countries in Europe, then Asia, Africa, the Americas, and other jurisdictions, following the geographical standard subdivisions -094-099. Now if you wanted to use the -1- special subtopics, you would have to start the sequence all over again: 333.75’11 Reserves, once again in Europe, then Asia, and so on. Then you would have to start yet another sequence 333.75’12 for “Requirements”, 333.75’13 “Consumption” (further subdivided into 333.75‘137 “Abuse and wastage”), and so on and on. So my little collection on forest resources of, say, Southeast Asia, would be scattered and interspersed with other geographical jurisdictions according to these special topics. 

The problem, as far as I can tell, is that the numbers don’t provide for sub-classifying by special topic within each geography: if you wanted to do say 333.75’0954’11, 333.75’0954’12, 333.75’0954’13, and so on, it wouldn’t work, because ‘0954 can’t be suffixed like that. If the special topics ’11, ’12, etc. had been provided through the standard subdivision connector -04-, this would have been possible, but since the suffixes are attached directly, we cannot do the arrangement resource-country-special topic. So we are forced to do resource-special topic-country, which to my mind is not as useful in the normal course.

There are a couple of cases in which, however, the arrangement resource-special topic-country may be called for. I gave the example of Law, above: 333.75’026’09.. Forest-law-geography may be worthwhile, as it brings together all works on forest law at the head of the sequence. I also use it  for resource economics: 333.7’0681 Natural resource economics, valuation, etc., or 333.75’0681 Forest resource economics (works which emphasis the land and natural resource aspects rather than narrower business decisions like rotation and regulation of yield, which I send to 634.9). There is one work which may merit its own special topic number: this is a report “Rationale for Prescribing the Requisite Forest/Tree Cover in India” by K.D.Singh. This is a prime candidate for special topic ’11 Reserves, giving 333.75’11’0954 SIN. But this would be a sole occupant of this interstice, hence liable to get lost in the long term. I have to choose between this and the more gregarious 333.75’0954 SIN, which is what I may prefer because even I may forget that I have used 333.75’11 for this single item! As I said above, the option of 333.75’0954’11 or ‘011 or ‘00411 is not available, hence I would have to sacrifice the precision of narrow classification in favour of ease of location in the future.

Secondly, the main sub-divisions of 333.7 are to do with specific categories of natural resources: 333.73 Land, .736 Arid lands, .74 Grasslands, .75 Forest lands, and so on. The same micro-divisions are provided for each of these as well, but once again each reader may well have a different opinion of which of the sub-sub-classes (’11 to ’17) is appropriate. This will only result in frustration when one tries to locate a particular book. Much better to put all under the overall head (333.74 for Grasslands, for example), followed by the facet notation for geographical location (‘0954 for instance), then three letters from author name and year.

Indeed, the most useful facet classification here seems to be the geographical, something which will probably sound sensible to most users. If one wants to go further, of course, we can always append standard subdivisions, but using two zeroes instead of one: 333.74’0954’0072, research, for instance.  Or 333.75’0954’0026, Forest in India- law aspects. You could, alternatively, reverse the order if you wanted to group all law titles in one location, 333.75’026’0954 Forest law - India.

I make one exception for not using the ’11-’17 subdivisions. This is to denote the specific subject of “Joint forest management”. The number range >15-17 Management and control is introduced with the comment “Class here citizen participation, planning, policy”, but this is merely tantalizing, as what is provided under it are the numbers 15 Development (consisting of 152 Improvement, 153 Reclamation, rehabilitation, restoration, 158 Subsidies), 16 Conservation and protection, 17 Control of usage. Of course, Joint Forest management probably has elements of all of these. However, in order to have one uniform or customary location, I have centred on 153 to denote Joint management: 333.75’153 Joint forest management. This will be followed by the usual standard subdivisions, such as ‘09.. for geographical location, etc.

All other forestry items are now classed under the general number 333.75’09…., subdivided by geography (the one exception so far being 333.75’026, Forest law). I have come to this conclusion because I am not happy at the way the collection is dispersed if I use the ’11-17 sub-numbers. That is, every time I take up an item I tend to change my mind about which of these it will fit under. There is no long-term stability or consistency in the way these ’11-17 numbers are liable to be interpreted. That’s why I have decided that they are more or less superfluous (except for the one number, ‘153, for Joint management). This can apply to each category of land, not just 333.75 Forest.

One other complication, as discussed in the previous post #26 (here!), is the choice between the social sciences, 300s, and science, 500s, or technology, 600s. In this regard, I am not quite satisfied with Dewey’s instructions under 333.75 (for instance). These subdivisions seem to be providing narrowly for forest products, rather than the more over-arching concept of forest lands (which is what 333.75 is about, strictly speaking). I would prefer to keep the narrower topics of forest products under 634.9, such as timber supply, demand and production, forest management and regulation as a technical subject, non-timber products, etc. What I think 333.75 is suitable for, is for books that deal with forest lands in the broader economy and polity, and all those that look at the interaction of forests with society. Forest policy and history would definitely come under the social science categories, hence 333.75; but reports of forest area would go to 634.9 unless they addressed the social aspects. Forest economics poses a special problem; since it is to do with application of economic principles, it evidently should be under 333.75; but as the business end of forest management, it would be more appropriate under 634.9 (maybe with the help of suffix ‘068). So that’s the way I would prefer to deal with forest economics books: those which deal with forests in the overall socio-economic framework go to 333.75, but those focused narrowly on business economics (the rotation question, for example), to 634.9.

Similar considerations would apply in deciding between 333.7 numbers and 630 numbers for agriculture and soil conservation, or between 333.78 Recreation and wilderness areas and 639.95 Wildlife reserves, and so on. Works that deal with social and political considerations will go to the social sciences; more technical accounts, to the technology numbers. That’s why, incidentally, I would send Gifford Pinchot’s autobiography (he was the first , and politically highly influential, chief of the US Forest Service) to 333.75, rather than 634.9!

The principle I like to follow is that the end result should look logical and convenient, and not that the precise Dewey location should be assigned fanatically. Similar considerations apply to the subject of climate change (which have a place under 363.7), but in order not to disperse books on the environmental conservation area, can well be brought back under 333.7 in a small home collection (see post #31 here!).

14 More Forestry numbers

It is seen that forestry topics can be accommodated under 634.9 Forestry as well as under 333.75 Forest lands. This division between the mother-lode under agricultural technology and the social sciences in fact mirrors what is happening to the field of forestry itself: all the shiny new book spines, like bright young research students, will flock to the social science cabinets under 333.7, leaving the old dusty tomes to moulder in 634.9 in the company of doddering old colonials and others of their ilk. Probably this is one reason why 634.9 seems to have been abandoned by the folks at Dewey, whereas other areas are constantly being developed and modified.

ODC had a separate primary number 6 which encompassed Forest management, Business economics of forestry, and Administration and organization of forest enterprises. This sometimes looks like overkill, because there are just too many detailed subject headings, apart from further choices under 7 Marketing of forest products, etc., and 8 Forest products and their utilization, 9 Forests and forestry from the national point of view, Social economics of forestry (what we refer to in DDC 333.75).. Dewey seems in general to be more circumspect in introducing subject headings, preferring entry numbers to cover a well defined range of ideas, leaving it to standard subdivisions for finer division.

Thus, other standard DDC subdivisions can be used as usual, for instance Forest terminology can be put under 634.9’014 using “standard subdivision” -014, Forest law can be put under -02 (i.e., 634.9’02, though this seems to be “optional”, Dewey preferring the main number 340. The choice is between putting all the forestry books in one location, or distributing them across the whole collection.  Obviously, a professional would prefer to collect the subject matter volumes in one compact location. Other useful standard subdivision suffixes are -07 Study and teaching, which can accommodate research methodology and institutions (though not the results of research, which have to go under the appropriate subject head), and of course -09 Historical and geographical treatment.

There is no separate number for policy in DDC, we have to make do with 634.9 itself with geographical subdivisions -09, or 333.75, with its special subdivisions. Or maybe stretching it, we could add a standard subdivision -01 Philosophy and theory, whereas ODC has a choice of subdivisions under primary class 9 or using “auxiliary numbers” -09 (which seems to parallel the main number 9 itself!). ODC seems to have a number of very similar subject headings, which makes it difficult to standardise.

My office library used the device of classing forestry under DDC 634.9, and then subdividing by ODC, but after trying this for some time, I was just not comfortable with this sort of duality. I finally decided to switch over completely to DDC, forcing me to go through some heroics to get specific topic headings using the Standard Subdivisions.

In the course of my web browsing, I came upon this resource for classification of forestry subjects: the IUFRO Global Forestry Information Service GFIS, with the following id:

www.iufro-gfis.net/handbook/ (accessed on 26 November 2004 (!). There is an Appendix 3-1 that gives a breakdown of forestry by topic headings grouped by subject, e.g. Silviculture, then Physiology and Genetics, Forest Operations, Inventory Growth Yield etc., and so on. There is a GFIS “Classification Scheme” that gives the “Forest Decimal Classification” (FDC) that generally mirrors the Oxford classification (ODC), with a proviso that this will later be “supplemented or replaced by other schemes” such as Dewey. Most interesting for Dewey fans, there is a section giving DDC equivalents for a selection of FDC numbers. The DDC numbers suggested are scattered over a wide range of locations: e.g., 307 for Rural development, 320 for Forest Policy, 330 for General forest economics, Deforestation goes off to 363, and and so on; this will be most unsettling for forest professionals, unless the idea is to prefix a 634.9 or a 333.75 in front (which is not a permitted improvisation in Dewey, although concatenation of numbers using the colon : is available in the Universal, UDC).

13 Building the Dewey Forest by numbers!

As I said in the last post, DDC is rather sparse in its development of 634.9, Forestry. As against Oxford Decimal’s 60 pages of numbers and subject headings, DDC 20 has hardly four. The main subheadings are: 634.92 Forest management, which has sub-headings for  Regulation and for Mensuration as well; 634.93 Access and safety features; 634.95 Silviculture (includes Afforestation, Breeding, etc.); 634.96 Injuries, diseases, pests; 634.97 Kinds of trees; 634.98 Forest exploitation and products; 634.99 Agroforestry etc. Compared with the development of 630 to 633, Agriculture, this is very limiting. Indeed one wishes they had provided for development of Forestry on the same lines by ‘adding numbers following 63 in 630-633’ as is done in many other places in the DDC. Even the subject immediately preceding 634.9, Orchards and fruits (634 to 634.8), has more possibilities for systematic development. As most of the headings have the provision to add the posterior (end) digits numbers from diverse ranges under Agriculture. Rather grudgingly, 634.9 Forestry does have a couple of entries with an “add” instruction from the Agriculture range: there is a provision of adding to the number 634.96 Injuries, diseases, pests from the appropriate range under 632, and under 634.97 Kinds of trees, topics from ranges in Forestry itself.

Mapping numbers from ODC (the most detailed systematic development for Forestry), we obviously have to fall back on different devices to create subject numbers. ODC group 1, for example, has a series of headings for “Factors of the environment, Biology”. One obvious way of catering to these subjects would be a liberal use of the “standard subdivision” with connector -015-, which allows attachment of all the Science numbers (500-599). This can cover application of climate science, soil science, physics, geology, chemistry, zoology, botany, ecology, and so on. Indeed there is already a provision under 634.97 Kinds of trees to add the numbers following 583 for Dicotyledons, or following 584 for Monocots. The suffix -015 allows adding numbers from any heading in the range 500 to 599!

Another suggestive entry is 634.90688 Management of distribution (Marketing). This obviously uses “standard subdivision” connector -068, which actually provides a range --     0681 to -0688 covering management heads parallel to those under 658. Thus, -0681 Financial management mirrors 658.1 Organization and finance, -0682 Plant management mirrors 658.2 Plant management and so on;  -0688 Management of marketing thus parallels 658.8. One wonders why this is not extended throughout the range, so that subheadings under 658.x can also be appended. Well, sometimes I do cheat and do this to reach specific headings; consider this my local extension of -068x!  

Forest economics seems to present some special problems, because different choices can be made. For a start, if we want to stick with 634.9, we could create a number with standard subdivision -0681, maybe even extending it further to subtopics under 658.1 as suggested above. Of course, one may like to put it under 634.92 Forest management, thus 634.92’0681; Dewey (20) recommends putting “comprehensive works on management in forestry in 634.9068”. Another possibility, however, is a totally different number in Economics, such as under 338 Production economics (specifically, 338.1749 Products of forestry) or 333.7 Natural resources, specifically 333.75 Forest lands. The Notes in Dewey 20 explain that 333.75 is “primarily concerned with forest land and uncut timber as present and future resources”, whereas 338 numbers are “primarily concerned with cut timber as a product to be sold”. The tendency seems to be to put discussions on forest resources in general in 333.75, whereas timber (lumber, logs, and other products) would go under 338. This of course will make the forester mad and stomp his boots, so it may be better for everyone’s sanity to put forest products under 634.9 with or without the suffix -068x, keeping 333.75 and its subdivisions for books of forest land policy, such as the discussions on how much forest is required, on how to manage with the community, etc. The question remains, where would standard books on “forest economics” go? My own hunch is that older texts, which look at it mainly from the business management point of view (like the classic Duerr), are best put under 634.9’068,  while 333.75 and subdivisions are suitable for more recent ones, which deal with social and political (economy) issues, including indigenous peoples’ rights, community management, forest conservation policy and strategy, incentives for conservation, and so on. In fact the ‘centered entry’ >15-17 under 333.7-333.9 introduces “Management and control”, with the instruction “Class here citizen participation, planning, policy”, which is appropriate for things like joint forest management (JFM). There is regrettably no separate number for JFM or participatory management; below >15-17 are three subheadings, 15 Development, 16 Conservation and protection, 17 Control of usage. It is anybody’s choice which of these three is best suited to house JFM: I tend to use 153 Reclamation, rehabilitation, restoration, thus giving the number for JFM 333.75’153.  

Another bugbear (for me) has been classifying agro-forestry, social forestry, forestry projects, etc.: they could go under 634.99, but what a jumble! I finally improvised a number-cum-alphabetical system to separate different projects and geographical jurisdictions. Of course, let me also make a note that we have not even started to consider other products technology numbers, such as 676 Pulp & paper technology, 674 Lumber processing, wood products, cork,  684.08 Woodworking (and home workshops, i.e. DIY stuff), 691.1 Timber under 691 Building materials, 694 Wood construction and carpentry, and other products groups that will have an interest for professional foresters.