Analyze

How does visualizing allows us to set the parameters to make the future vision a reality?

In their introduction, Vermeylen's argument for a particularist and decolonial approach to justice through a recognition of plural ontologies and epistemologies that decenters Western liberal discourse and its theory of justice. How does bringing the lens of coloniality into environmental justice literature alter our visions of energy futures? Can we make appeals to environmental justice without recourse to liberal theories of individual rights and property ownership? More specifically, I am wondering how our team can study and address this dynamic plurality of ways of understanding and experiencing in/justice in this site, and how can we engage this plurality in productive ways? What axes of difference and inequality should we be looking for/at (race, gender, class, sexual orientation, citizenship, housing status, etc)? If the Anthropocene is coloniality by another name, how can we foreground this in our approach?

The authors productively place three bodies of theory in conversation, abolitionist theories, urban political ecology, and decolonial theory, to rewrite the intellectual trajectories of EJ as extending the legacy of the Black Radical Tradition. What are our intellectual and political genealogies as students and researchers of the quotidian anthropocene? What genealogies are we pushing against? Drawing from their examples of spaces and historical moments of interracial solidarity, what kinds of coalitions do we see ourselves partnering with and contributing to as (largely?) newcomers to the activism in Austin?

In this fascinating review, the authors show how environmental justice is reproductive justice (following the water protectors at Standing Rock) and how this intersection reshapes understandings of the environment, embodiment, and exposure. I was particularly interested in the concepts of social and cultural re/production, and how we might think about this in light of Austin's rapid gentrification. They discuss an intersectional approach as a multi-scalar approach, from climate change to chemical exposure in the home - and I think this could be extended to a inter/multi-generational approach to justice (esp given our focus on renewables). The authors show how the RJ framework rethinks the individualism of reproductive choice as the right to conceive and bear children in conditions of social justice and human flourishing - then how does the current energy system (and future energy transitions) negate or create these conditions, and for whom? If we think about biological/cultural reproduction, how do we also incorporate the concept of reproductive labor into our analysis? Finally, I think they make an important point about the harms of documentation, and it would be great to hear everyone's thoughts (Esp those who have participated in earlier field campuses) on what the goal and ethics of our knowledge production are?

Walsh's piece gives us a concise history and geography of environmental racism in Austin, by drawing our attention to how ineequality is written into city law and urban planning. The ongoing legacies of segregation have shaped social life from access to public services to access to recreational spaces. Given the foundations of environmental racism in zoning laws and land use regulations, so succinctly highlighted by Walsh, how does/must the process of energy transition address these issues? Can there be zoning for justice, and what would that look like? In what way can our work at the field campus contribute to the existing work being done by orgs like El Pueblo and PODER?

The report was written to examine the severe increase in the number of internally displaced people in Bogot and Cartagena, Columbia. HRW was concerned with the number of people and families being forcibly displaced by paramilitary groups and their lack of access to education and public health services.

Dr Schmid discusses her view that the engineers and scientists should not be the only people looking at the response to a nuclear incident. She believes that nuclear response teams need to move away from those in the late 1900s, in which a select technically-competent few were in charge of maintaining the safety and security of nuclear facilities, to those that bring together scholars, technical experts, and international relief organizations to educate the public and determine what is in the best interest of the residents of the area as well as society in general. Dr. Schmid believes that scholarship in science, technology, society studies applies to this situation and can be a great help in determining future actions.

The authors support their argument by referencing a study that showed that race was associated with how quickly one received therapeutics. They also referenced that PIH was able to help in Haiti by introducing a model of care in which the patients chose someone to assist them by delivering drugs and supportive care in their home. This person would live nearby and was seen by some as a very effective way to remove barriers to care for AIDS and other chronic diseases in impoverished environments. They also say by removing issues like access to clean water that impoverished areas see, MTCT rates of HIV decreased.

The system could be difficult to work with if you didn't speak any of the languages that the site is translated into. Addionally, if you want to anotate a source, it seems like the process to do so is somewhat convoluted. Besides that, it is mobile friendly and it has a decent user interface. So overall, it seems to be easy to work with.

MSF uses previous sucesses with under their way of providing care to support their misson and future growth. MSF has been active in more than 60 countries providing aid where its needed most. Their continued success of delivering aid and further treatment provides enormouse support.