打破藩篱为何不受欢迎？

Fifteen years ago, Thomas Snitch fell in love. Not with a human being, however: he and his wife had been trekking in Uganda and encountered some gorillas in the wild. And that sparked a passion for finding ways to protect these creatures from increasingly frequent attacks by poachers.

15年前，托马斯·斯尼奇(Thomas Snitch)“坠入了爱河。不过，他爱上的不是人类：他和妻子在乌干达徒步旅行时遇到了一群野生大猩猩，这激发了他保护这种动物的热情，想设法让它们免遭偷猎者日益猖獗的猎杀。

Initially, Snitch, a University of Maryland trustee, supported the dizzying multitude of wildlife funds that have sprung up in the west in recent years. But then he had a brainwave. As an adjunct to his academic work, Snitch advises the US military on how to predict the movements of insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq, with a view to using satellite devices to foil roadside improvised explosive devices (IEDs).

斯尼奇是美国马里兰大学(University of Maryland)的校董。最初，斯尼奇支持近年来涌现的各种五花八门的野生动物保护基金会。但后来，他灵机一动，想到一个新点子。在从事学术工作之余，斯尼奇为美国军方预测阿富汗和伊拉克的叛乱者行踪提供咨询，目的是使用卫星设备找到公路边的简易爆炸装置(IED)。

One day, as Snitch was staring at his satellite maps of Iraq, he spotted a similarity to something he recognised from his wildlife passion. For just as insurgents tend to move across landscapes in predictable ways in order to plant landmines, poachers follow familiar patterns to place snares too. The professor started testing algorithms and satellite-mapping techniques – including material gathered from drones via his consortium known as GeoEye – and became convinced that he had stumbled on a powerful new way to prevent animal deaths. “We have found that terrorists are to poachers as IEDs are to animal snares [and] as US troop targets are to tigers, rhinos and gorillas, Snitch says passionately. “Simply stated, the models work for either situation.

有一天，斯尼奇盯着伊拉克的卫星地图看时，发现预测叛乱者行踪与研究野生动物保护有一些共通之处。正如叛乱者掩埋地雷的路线往往是可预测的，偷猎者设置陷阱也有规律可循。斯尼奇开始试验各种算法和卫星绘图技术（包括他旗下名为地理眼(GeoEye)的企业集团用无人机收集的资料），最后他确信自己偶然找到了一种能有效阻止偷猎的新途径。斯尼奇激动地说道：“我们发现，如果把恐怖分子当做偷猎者，那么简易爆炸装置就相当于动物陷阱，美军的目标就相当于老虎、犀牛和大猩猩。简言之，这些模型对两种情况都适用。

It might almost seem a heartwarming tale. After all, the number of animals being killed by poachers has spiralled in recent years, as impoverished Africans and Asians rush to meet soaring demand for animal parts from countries such as China. In the first half of this year alone, for example, poachers killed 281 rhinos in South Africa, compared with 418 in 2011 and 333 in 2010, according to government data. Though figures for the rest of Africa are more patchy, similar increases in rhino poaching are believed to be occurring there, and of gorillas and tigers.

这似乎算得上是个温暖人心的故事。毕竟，近年来死于偷猎者之手的动物数量呈螺旋式上升，原因是穷困的非洲和亚洲人为了满足中国等国对动物器官日益飙升的需求而大肆猎杀动物。例如，官方数据显示，仅今年上半年，偷猎者就在南非猎杀了281头犀牛，而在2011年和2010年这个数字分别为418头和333头。尽管其它非洲国家的数据较为零散，但人们相信这些国家被猎杀的犀牛、大猩猩和老虎的数量出现了类似的增长。

But, sadly, there is a catch. When Snitch approached the various anti-poaching NGOs – which number around 18 in Africa alone – he was rebuffed. Some groups already use some satellite imagery. However, most do not. And none expressed any desire to co-operate; instead the charities simply told him to send money instead. Even when he offered to use his team of scientists, with access to US or Israeli military drones for free, there was no interest in his idea.

但遗憾的是，出现了一个蹊跷的情况。当斯尼奇与各种各样的反偷猎非政府组织（仅在非洲就有18家左右）接触时，他遭到了冷遇。有些组织已经使用了一些卫星图片。但大多数组织没有使用。斯尼奇接触的所有这些非政府慈善组织都表示没有兴趣合作，相反，这些组织只是告诉他捐钱就行了。即便他表示自己的科学家团队可以帮忙，而且科学家们可以免费使用美国或以色列的军用无人机，这些组织还是对他的想法不感兴趣。

Why? Snitch thinks that part of the problem may be that the NGOs felt threatened by his novel idea; if an outsider came into “their territory, with a technology that might reduce the poaching problem, the raison d’être of these wildlife funds might be undermined – and thus their ability to raise money. “In a weird way, these folks would rather turn down the offer of free help to save the rhinos, than be put in a position where their annual report states that fewer animals are being taken by poachers, he fumes.

原因何在？斯尼奇认为，部分原因可能是这些非政府组织感到这个新奇想法威胁到自身存在：如果一个外人带着可能减少偷猎数量的技术，进入“他们的地盘，或许会削弱其存在的理由，从而损害其筹款能力。斯尼奇愤怒地说道：“不知怎么的，这些家伙宁愿拒绝挽救犀牛的无偿援助，也不愿在年报中说被偷猎者猎杀的动物数量下降了。

For my part, I suspect cultural prejudice is also a factor. The kind of environmental activists who work for NGOs tend to be wary of computer-wielding geeks with military connections – doubly so, given the controversies that surround the use of drones in places such as Afghanistan.

在我看来，文化偏见可能也是原因之一。那些为非政府组织工作的环保主义者，往往对与军方有联系的摆弄计算机的极客十分警惕——围绕在阿富汗等地使用无人机的争议，更提高了他们的警惕心。

. . .

……

But whatever the truth about those gorillas and rhinos, perhaps the key moral is the lesson this tale reveals about silos. Back in July I wrote a column about some of the great benefits that individuals or institutions can enjoy when they manage to jump across mental and intellectual silos. Since then, I have had a plethora of emails from readers offering inspiring examples of such silo-busting in action.

但无论这个关于大猩猩和犀牛的故事真相如何，其关键教益也许是，故事在打破“藩篱方面给我们上了一课。今年7月，我写了一篇专栏文章，阐述了个人或机构成功跨越思想和知识上的“藩篱能够为自身带来的一些巨大益处。自那之后，我收到许多读者写来的电子邮件，提供了许多令人鼓舞的打破藩篱的现实事例。

But what I did not stress enough in my column is that attempts to silo-bust may not just be innovative. They can also have a nasty habit of upending the power structure, or of challenging conventional hierarchies. And so – sadly – for almost every story I was sent about the benefits of silo-busting, I received numerous examples of frustration. There are individuals in the US, for example, who have tried to change the operations of municipal government – but have met with fierce union opposition. There is a well-meaning academic at a west coast university who has tried to promote interdisciplinary research – only to learn that this could threaten his tenure track. And a senior individual in one large pharmaceutical company described how she tried to brainstorm with other researchers – only to be told that she should not “give away her departments’ secrets.

但我在那篇专栏文章中强调得不够的是，打破藩篱的努力可能不仅意味着创新。这些努力往往也可能造成一些讨厌的后果：颠覆原有的力量格局，或挑战传统的等级体系。因此，我遗憾地发现，在我收到的邮件中，举例说明打破藩篱带来益处的邮件只占少数，大多数邮件举出的例子都是令人灰心的。例如，美国有人试图改变市政府的运作模式，但却遭到工会的强烈反对。美国西海岸一所大学里的一名学者试图推动跨学科研究，他的出发点是好的，结果却发现这可能威胁到自己的终身教职评定。还有一封邮件来自一家大型制药公司的一名资深女研究员，她说自己试图与其他研究员自由讨论，结果却被告知不应该“泄露本部门的秘密。

Thankfully, not everyone is deterred. Snitch, for example, remains dedicated to using his algorithms and drones in novel ways. He is working with police groups in Washington DC, for example, to explore how satellite technology could cut crime. And notwithstanding the wariness of environmental NGOs, his team has started some pilot projects in Bhutan, Rwanda and Nepal to track the poachers, tigers, gorillas and wardens. But do not expect a revolution soon, far less any dramatic change in those poaching statistics. “I have spent years trying to kick down silos in Washington, Snitch laments. Sadly – and notwithstanding the rhinos – it is an all-too-common tale.

值得庆幸的是，并非所有人都被可能的不好后果吓倒了。例如，斯尼奇仍在致力于为自己的算法和无人机寻找新用途。一个例子是他正在与华盛顿特区的警察部门合作，探索如何利用卫星技术减少犯罪。尽管环保组织十分警惕，但斯尼奇的团队已经开始在不丹、卢旺达和尼泊尔开展一些试点项目，记录偷猎者、老虎、大猩猩和管理员的踪迹。但不要以为很快发生革命性的改变，更别指望偷猎方面的数据会出现显著变化。斯尼奇叹息道：“我花了许多年的时间试图打破华盛顿方面的藩篱。遗憾的是，尽管出现了犀牛，但斯尼奇的故事仍是一个极其常见的故事。