Analyze

Astrophysics is a discipline that has a lot to do with environmental justice, even if it doesn’t look like so. Astrophysics research nowadays involves both large cutting-edge infrastructures and a great number of people and institutions, usually at international level. Most of these projects require to be placed in very specific environments, which are not very common on our planet, to function in the best conditions. The territories chosen to host large facilities for astrophysics, as remote as they can be, are not empty. In most cases, they are inhabited (or regularly frequented) by people who are not always involved in the decision process and may see the construction as an invasion of lands they have owned or occupied for centuries. In this context, we believe that what pulls people away from environmental justice advocacy, especially those who do not live in or near these territories, is the lack of information and awareness about this topic, which may cause strongly polarized opinions and harshful discussions on the topic. To try to fill this gap, as science communicators we decided to develop a game-based activity which fosters the debate about this connection. Among our inspirations is the struggle of the protectors of Mauna a Wākea, on the Big Island of Hawai‘i. The mountaintop is a sacred place for Native Hawaiians, who have been fighting to protect their ancestral land from the construction of the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT). There are many other examples of large astronomical infrastructures and their impact on territories, including in our own country (Italy), some more virtuous than others, that show how the Astrophysics research world is strongly connected to environmental justice. For this activity, we chose the Creative Commons PlayDecide format, which aims to facilitate simple, respectful and fact-based group discussions. The game consists of a different set of cards containing facts about the topic, issues for different interest groups and personal stories of fictional individuals who are involved or affected by the topic. By telling the stories of different characters involved in this kind of situation, we aim to enlarge the debate, fostering the change of perspective of players. We wish that many people around the world download and use the game, either during public outreach activities with schools and the general public or as a self-awareness exercise within the astronomical community. The game does not refer to a specific facility, but we researched study cases related to astronomical observatories in sites such as Mauna a Wākea (Hawaiʻi), Kitt Peak and Mount Graham (Arizona), the Sardinia Radio Telescope in Italy as well as ongoing projects such as the SKA Observatory in South Africa and Australia. In particular, for the story cards, we strived to provide a balance in terms of gender and affected communities, trying as much as we could to avoid stereotypes, in the awareness that we, as the authors of the activity, are a group of white, female astronomers from a G7 country.

Toniolo, Rachele and Claudia Mignone. 2023. "Some students play the PlayDecide activity at a Science Festival in Italy." In 4S Paraconference X EiJ: Building a Global Record, curated by Misria Shaik Ali, Kim Fortun, Phillip Baum and Prerna Srigyan. Annual Meeting of the Society of Social Studies of Science. Honolulu, Hawai'i, Nov 8-11.

Because this document is the first chapter of a book, there was no source list provided, therefor no conclusions could be drawn.

Didier Fassin is a French anthropologist and a sociologist in the school of science at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, NJ. He has conducted fieldwork in Senegal, Ecuador, South Africa, and France. Fassan is also trained as a physician in internal medicine and holds a degree in public health. Some of his early research focused on medical anthropology, the AIDS epidemic, mortality disparities, and global health. 

The author, Didier Fassin, is a French anthropologist and sociologist with training in medicine and public health. He has worked in the field of medical anthropology for decades through research and field experience. He currently works as a professor of social science at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. 

The article focuses on the adapting regulations for ill immigrants to remain in France in order to receive treatment unavailable in their countries. Through the changes in protocol over nearly a decade the author shows how the system changed from case by case process in which many immigrants were denied a residence permit while suffering from serious illnesses, to an organized protocol that aimed to provide an equal opportunity to applicants regardless of location and department.

The argument is supported through a combination of personal stories, historical changes in protocol, and analysis of the reasons why applicants resort to a medical argument for residence permits. The use of personal stories of applicants highlights the inconsistencies in the process largely due to compassionate bias on the part of officials reading the applications, as well as the resources available in different cities. As the protocols were changed the article shows that while some of the inconsistencies were resolved, the process of determining who can and cannot receive medical treatment necessitates personal judgment which inevitably affects the outcome.

• “Sometimes the foreigner, too, is no more than his body, but this body is no longer the same: useless to the political economy, it now finds its place in a new moral economy that values suffering over labor and compassion more than rights.”
• “The compassion protocol is thus a procedure of the last resort that derives from a form of sympathy evoked in the face of suffering. It demands the right to keep alive individuals who have nothing except their mere existence.”
• “the medical officers were caught between the duties mandated to them by the public institution that employed them and those their profession required them to respect”

The article provides statistics of approved applications based on the medical reason for the application and the department the application was processed at based on location, to show how different acceptance rates are. The article also provides many stories of applications, invoking an emotional response that allows the reader to sympathize with the personal challenge that faces medical officers and government officials making the discussions that may dramatically affect the health and wellbeing of individuals.

The article does not address emergency response, rather it dealt with public health and the government’s responsibility for the health of immigrants. A significant part of public health is the allocation and availability of resources, which differs based on country. The argument made is that the available medical resources in France should be used to assist those who do not have access in their countries. Unfortunately, there remains the responsibility to the citizens of France to provide access to any and all resources necessary for their health which necessitates denying treatment to some immigrants. The issues faced by the government and public health interests is how to balance those moral obligations, which is discussed in the article.

The article has not been referenced extensively, as it is focused on a very specific topic. However the ideas presented in the article, and by extension the ideas presented in the book have been included in other papers including some of the author's later works.