Analyze

我訪問到的阿嬤也有在高度人力密集的產業中工作過，如餐飲、紡織等等，反映了當代大環境中原民來到都市的處境。都市原民作為台灣產業發展的推手之一，卻無法擁有安身立命的家，而被迫在各處流浪，直到近代才開啟了與政府溝通的橋樑，卻依然有種種難題需要克服。

What I find really noteworthy in this text is how Julia Watts Belser takes the poem by Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha and includes it into a scientific text. In this way, she not only allows an affected person to have her say, the poem also leaves the reader with a very striking image of the connection between the river and the body, in multiple ways, as well as the connection between enviromental harm and disability.

The text was published in 2020 (Vol. 40, No. 4) by The Ohio State University Libraries in their Journal Disability Studies Quarterly (DSQ). It is, as you can read on their Homepage "a multidisciplinary and international journal of interest to social scientists, scholars in the humanities and arts, disability rights advocates, and others concerned with the issues of people with disabilities. It represents the full range of methods, epistemologies, perspectives, and content that the field of disability studies embraces. DSQ is committed to developing theoretical and practical knowledge about disability and to promoting the full and equal participation of persons with disabilities in society."

The author connects disability theories and activism with environmental justice, this approach allows her to show how disability is related to and through environmental harm, she shows how diagnoses are used politically in these cases, and looks critically at how these processes determine how, when and in what favor human and environmental harm is taken into account. The writing is shaped by the consequences of the Anthropocene like environmental harm linked to health isusses, especially affected are communities of color and poor communities in the United States, here pre-existing patters of structural inequality, already known from climate change come into play,  this communities are the most affected and the least responsible.

The text left me with a question that I actually often find frustrating in the process of research. On page 6, the authors take up the criticism of a Fukushima resident who says: “[W]hat you call research does not give benefits to local people” (Miyamoto and Ankei, 2008, cited in Ankei, 2013, p.24). The authors here suggest adopting or borrowing terms from the field that are used by citizens to create a more “socially robust science” (Bonhoure et al. 2019, Nowotny, 2003). From the authors' point of view, this can be achieved above all by paying closer and careful attention to the language of citizen organizations and the contexts these groups work in. After further elaboration, the authors call for citizen science terms and concepts developed by, for and with citizens to better reflect the values, priorities, and stakes of its main agents and of all concerned parties. But I am not sure that this approach alone would be sufficient to adequately address such expressed criticism. Perhaps one should ask about the expectations of people one is researching with/about in order to enter into a conversation and to be able to understand this criticism. Perhaps the authors will address this point again in further publications. I think to ask oneself how to deal with this criticism methodically and ethically could also be very fruitful for empirical research in general.

I could not find the answer to this prompt as there were not citations listed on the article.

Scott Knowles is the Head of the Department of History at Drexel University in Pennsylvania. He specializes in the history of technology, disaster, and public policy. He has a number of other publications that are relevant to the DSTS Network including a book, The Disaster Experts: Mastering Risk in Modern America, and co-authored "Critical Studies in Risk and Disaster, and a volume on the Fukushima disasters. He is not professionally situated among emergency responders; however, he does conduct research on the subject.

This program is viewed as a novelty to the public, as it is the first college of its kind to offer a degree in homeland security and emergency preparedness. A number view it as a step in the right direction and an innovation. The program does not appear to have been around for long enough to yeild graduates, so those results are still unkown.

this report has spread to a number of academic institutions and their websites. This report seems to be relatively old, so I was unable to find any news reports that cited it. It appears that there are a number of other articles related to this topic; however, I was unable to find any direct connections between them and this report.

Outside of this class and STS 6834 at Virgina Tech, it was difficult to find other places where this article was referenced. Because the article was published as part of a collection of articles related to this same topic, I assume that those who purchase the book for educational and research purposes read and discus the article at some length.

The citations ranged widely. Many of the citations at the beginning of the article seemed to not be related to treatment as much as they were to social issues. There were also several articles that the authors referenced that the authors had written previously. Finally, there were also articles relating to treatment and statistics based on different treatment strategies on micro- and macro-scales. These citations show that the authors may have a decent support in social reform. I'm not sure how common it is to cite your own works as fact in academia, so I will withhold comment on that.