Skip to main content

Analyze

South Korea

Misria

In 2019, the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea passed a law identifying particle pollution (also called particulate matter, PM) as a “social disaster” (Framework Act on the Management of Disasters and Safety 2019). It was a response to nationwide attention to particle pollution from 2017, when apocalypse-like particle pollution occurred. It is not uncommon to characterize pollution as a disaster. Pollution is often described in damage-based narratives like disasters because environmental pollution becomes visible when a certain kind of damage occurs (Nixon 2011). PM is a mixture of extremely small particles and liquid droplets (EPA 2023). An established method for assessing the health risks associated with PM is the utilization of government or World Health Organization (WHO) air quality indices. These indices reflect the potential harm to human health based on PM concentrations. However, due to the limitations of the available monitoring data and the assumption of a certain normality according to the air quality index, its utility is diminished for bodies that fall outside this assumed range of normality. The existing practices and knowledge in pollution control had individualized pollution by presuming certain states of normalcy and excluding others. To challenge this, the anti-PM advocates in South Korea have defined, datafied, perceived, and adjusted the toxicity of particulate matter in various ways. They refer to the air quality index given by the WHO or the government, but they also set their own standards to match their needs and ways of life. They actively measure the air quality of their nearest environment and share, compare, and archive their own data online. The fact that the severity of air pollution is differently tolerated by individuals challenges the concept of the toxicity index that presupposes a certain normalcy. Describing pollution as a disaster contributes to environmental injustice by obscuring the underlying context and complexities of pollution. With the values of care, solidarity, and connectivity, capturing different perspectives of living with pollution and listening to stories from different bodies can generate alternative knowledge challenging environmental injustice. Drawing upon the stories of different bodies and lives with pollution, we can imagine other ways of thinking about the environment and pollution that do not externalize risks nor individualize responsibility. 

Kim, Seohyung. 2023. "Beyond the Index: Stories of Otherized Bodies Crafting Resistant Narratives against Environmental Injustice in South Korea." 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.

A People’s Orientation to a Regenerative Economy

Yvonne

The Grassroots Global Alliance provides a strategy for just transition to a regenerative economy. For the policy makers, this organizations has come up with these questions as guidance: 

1. Who tells the story? 

2. Who makes the decision? 

3. Who benefits and how? 

4. What else will this impact? 

5. How will this build or shift power? 

Framework: Protect, Repair, Invest, Transform. Under each category, this organization presents their demands and solutions. 

Five points of intervention: the Narratives, Base Building and Organizing, Policy Development, Electoralization and Implementation, Direct Action. 

UK Food Bank

AmandaWindle

https://twitter.com/bateswalsall1/status/1264308701269233665?s=20

The twitter link above shows a video of a foodbank near where I live in London in a shopping centre in Elephant and Castle. This is a foodbank queue for the unemployed and those receiving benefits. This is not a queue for the homeless. It also shows close proximity and in some places the inability to distance and follow national guidance.

Additional information from WHO - Compound Vulnerabilities

AmandaWindle

"Currently, there are no studies on the survival of the COVID-19 virus in drinking-water or sewage. The morphology and chemical structure of this virus are similar to those of other coronavirusesa for which there are data about both survival in the environment and effective inactivation measures. This guidance draws on the existing evidence base and current WHO guidance on how to protect against viruses in sewage and drinking-water."

and 

"The COVID-19 virus is enveloped and thus less stable in the environment compared to non-enveloped human enteric viruses with known waterborne transmission (such as adenoviruses, norovirus, rotavirus and hepatitis A). "

Link: Water, sanitation, hygiene, and waste management for the COVID-19 virus, Interim guidance, 23 April 2020 by WHO and UNICEF: https://www.who.int/publications-detail/water-sanitation-hygiene-and-wa…

These excerpts from WHO regs, relate to Aalok Khandekar’s draft commentary, “Heat and Contagion in the Off-Grid City”  in relation to mentioning hepatitis.

And, also to a comment in previous weeks around air transmission and sewage across the border in north and south America made by Kim Fortun