We sat down with Dr. Hilary Flint to talk about what brought her to the Gund 10 years ago, and what she’s been doing since.

Tell me how you came to join the Gund.

The Gund Institute for Ecological Economics came across my radar as I was getting my master's degree in applied economics. I was interested in how society and individuals manage natural resources and conservation, and I became really intrigued and excited about ecological economics and the work at the Gund Institute. When I saw the posting for the first Gund PhD Fellowship, I knew I had to apply. I talked to (Gund Institute for Environment Director) Taylor (Ricketts) and then (Gund Fellow) Brendan Fisher—who would become my advisor. Then I came out to visit Burlington and UVM, and it just fit. The work, the Gund, Rubenstein, the people, the place: it was the right next move for my life.

What was your research while you were here?

My focus was using behavioral science to understand how people manage natural resources and make decisions about the environment. It was when (the book) Thinking Fast and Slow had just come out and behavioral science was hugely popular, but there seemed to be few applications to the environment. Early in my PhD I got the chance to collaborate with visiting MacMillan scholars Andrew Balmford and Steve Polasky, as well as Gund faculty and graduate students, on a literature review assessing knowledge and gaps in behavioral science for pro-environmental behavior. I also got to run a study with Vermont Audubon on recruiting interest in their Bird-Friendly Maple Project. Audubon partners with maple producers and advises them on how to manage their sugarbushes in ways that are beneficial for birds. I was able to run a field experiment in partnership with them and the Vermont Maple Sugar Makers’ Association, testing how different outreach messaging affected interest in the program. It was a fun project, and so very “Vermont.”

What was the Gund like when you joined?

It was quite a bit smaller than it is now. It was in the Johnson House, which is this old farmhouse across campus. A lot of graduate students were crammed in these small spaces, but it was actually quite lovely; it was cozy and collegial, and I made some of my best friends in the program there, that I continue to keep in touch with today. Every Friday we had the Gund Teas in this quirky “conference room,” which were always stimulating. Great, interesting people came in to give talks and to listen. The whole environment fostered conversation and collaboration.

Taylor was relatively new to the director position, and he created a tremendous community from the outset. It felt tight-knit, comfortable, fun, and supportive—while also doing good work! I don’t think a lot of graduate experiences can claim that. It was something that I was and am grateful to be a part of.

Were the Gund Teas similar to the GundxChanges we have today?

Yes, very similar. But each graduate student took a turn setting up. We boiled water, set out tea, mingled. It was great.

You're a board member now. What's different now?

Well, not having the stress of being in a PhD program is a tremendous weight off my shoulders! I feel fortunate to have the opportunity to come back and offer my perspective as someone who's been through the Gund in its formative years, and I’m glad that I can continue to stay connected to the Gund community. It feels good; it’s sort of empowering, after so many years of feeling like an imposter.

How does the Gund Institute compare to when you were here?

It seems like the Gund continues to create a space where, even though people are doing very different things, they are curious and engaged as part of this shared institution and vision. This Gund connection and collaborative culture make it easy to sit down next to somebody and strike up a conversation, maybe walk away with a new idea, or a new way of thinking about a problem, or a ski buddy.

It’s also clear in our board meetings and through visiting that the Gund has grown, and its impact has grown. The size and diversity of its membership and the types of things that people are researching and collaborating on have expanded, and the Gund has become even more ambitious in its goals. I think that’s really exciting.

What are you doing now?

I'm a senior research scientist at the University of Wyoming in the Haub School of Environment and Natural Resources. My focus is on understanding how private landowners make decisions about conservation, and on designing environmental programs that meet landowners where they are. My current project is on conserving habitat for the elk and mule deer that migrate out of Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks, as well as pronghorn herds that travel 100+ miles every spring and fall, across and onto private lands. The private lands in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem are increasingly changing hands and becoming fragmented and developed. I ask, what do these folks need to be able to maintain their land as this beautiful and critical open space that's important for the ecosystem and the animals?

How did the Gund Institute prepare you for your future path?

The Gund is very explicit about the value it places on partnerships between research and the work on the ground—not conducting research in a silo. My work now is funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and I’m working with Wyoming Game and Fish Department, the National Park Service and all these different interested parties. The Gund not only helped me see the importance of having those relationships, but also trained me to manage relationships and pursue projects that benefit the advancement of knowledge, the conservation of species, and the well-being of rural communities, all within a complex socio-political context. Conserving these migratory species and the landscape is largely about the people who live in these areas and the political and administrative decision-making processes involved. This big-picture perspective is a very “Gund” approach to an environmental problem that I use every day in my work.