Analyze

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?

This registry allows for the tracking of the health effects of the 9/11 disaster. It is open to the public, where they can see the most common disorders and afflictions that those effected by 9/11 are dealing with today. The public can access this website and read up on the rates of lung infection, heart disease, PTSD, alcohol use, as well as the effect it has had on adolescent health. This registry was not only set up for the public use though, it is also used and produced by researchers. The researchers track the longterm health effects 9/11 has had on those exposed. The data also provides experts and researchers with the means to draw conclusions and analyses. Learning about the long term effects of 9/11 will raise awareness as well as allow for the understanding of how disasters of this caliber can effect those around it, in both long term and short term ways. 

I personally wouldn't say that emergency response was a factor discussed or addressed in this paper. Rather,there was a discussion about illegal immigration and public health aspects and the duty France and other countries had to those seeking residence or living in their respective countries. I think more so, public health aspects were discussed in this paper as well as social aspects of duty and justice rather than emergency response. 

Yes, those enrolled in this program can achieve a Master of Science in DRL, a dual degree with a Master of Social Work and MS, or they can be certified in DRL.

This policy addresses vulnerable populations by offering financial exclusions to those who do not have above a certain income and cannot afford treatment and healthcare without assistance. Economically vulnerable populations with possible mental health issues are addressed through this policy. 

The author utilizes data and a number analysis of symptoms experienced, as well as interviews with those effected and how it altered their lives in hundreds of ways. Along with primary source interviews and data analysis, expert analysis and opinion is also provided as well.

A main focus of this article was the emergency response to nuclear power plant disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant, or in better words, the lack there of. Points and arguments made include the fact that this won't be the last the world sees of nuclear mishap and risk and also the severe need to not only depend on accident prevention, but focus must be shifted onto being prepared during emergencies. During the essay the author point blank states that, the essay is to raise awareness on the need for the creation of an  "international nuclear response team." The essay then focuses on what we can learn from the nuclear accident in Japan in order to establish better post emergency protocols and responses. 

Overall, Schmid outlines the fact that changes need to be made on a global level. She illustrates where there are shortcomings in current protocols and the desperate need to establish a team that is equipped and trained to response to nuclear mishaps, such as the one seen in Japan. She also accentuates the need for this response team to be established should be fast and that we can no longer drag our feet, citing dangers seen at Fukushima, Three Mile Island and Chernobyl.