Search

META: Water seems to be one important medium through which NOLA envisions the “impacts” of the Anthropocene—scarcity, abundance, temporalities and spatial distributions, management of, and hazards that emerge in its context. Less is said about the causal or attributional aspects of the Anthropocene. How might water function as an entry point into the assemblages of local anthropocenics?

I found the NOLA Hazard Mitigation Plan for 2018, which frames the impacts of the Anthropocene as an intersection of weather extremes amid climate change and evolving vulnerabilities of its people. Four of seven items in the executive summary note water as central to local interventions: flood awareness, flood repair, flood mitigation, flood infrastructure. Too much water or water in the wrong places and the aftereffect of water on infrastructure and lives. One expression, then, is preparedness.

MACRO: Mitigation is an interesting analytic for the Anthropocene. In the US mitigation plans are shaped by the 1988 Stafford Act (which amended the 1974 Disaster Relief Act). Constraints on communities come through rules, regulations, policies, (dis)incentives, and surveillance by state and federal authorities. Much of this is bound by economic and administrative discourses.

Goals are set in this document—broken out by timelines, activities, priorities, and capabilities. Another expression is classification of anthropocenics by subfields and accounting metrics. How do we measure progress and what is deferred to the future, 5-10 years out from today, a goal that has no tangible accountability but is named and acknowledged. What are the practices of naming, responsibility, and making (in)visible in the Anthropocene?

BIO: One new initiative, Ready for Rain, in particular is of interest to me as it highlights the more neoliberal vision for how the public should self-regulate risk and mitigate harm. I hear this as an extension of a government agency program to make the nation Weather Ready. Other bullets highlight “green” buildings, energies, and infrastructures. These could be examples of how the city envisions the Anthropocene feedback loop of humans changing/planning for climate alterations, which is a fairly typical lens.

Some questions: What does the water do? What does the water know? If we trace water in all its instantiations (e.g. historical water, flow of water, chemistry of water, application of water, temperature of water), what do we learn about the future imaginaries of what NOLA will / could / ought to become?

Resilience is a term that is widely embraced by many in city management and planning. It holds the positive gloss not just of recovery but bouncing back better. To my ears, it has become one of many anthems of the Anthropocene, a kind of restrained tempo thrumming along through communities that will adapt to climate change (or seasonal-to-subseasonal climate variability post Trump). They will mitigate, innovate, transform, strategize in order to endure unanticipated shocks, both chronic and acute.

NOLA is one of 100 Resilient Cities named by the Rockefeller Foundation sometime in 2013. Like others selected across the globe, the city of New Orleans would benefit from the resources of a Chief Resilience Officer (CRO), an expert in resilience to be hired to work within city governance to develop a strategic plan; NOLA's was published in 2015. Selection of the cities for the "100 Resilient Cities" initiative was difficult, a competitive bid for resources based primarily on a city's recent experience with disaster, usually connected to a weather or climate extreme (e.g. hurricane, flood, etc). Resources were provided via the hierarchy of the CRO, sometimes to hire staff, develop training for the community, and create working groups and to write the stratetic plan. As one former directer of NOLA RC said of this opportunity provided by Katrina, the disaster that qualified NOLA for Rockefeller monies, it demonstrates the need for an the age of resilience. In what ways is resilience measured, accounted for, adjudicated and managed through or in spite of this strategic document? 

The language of resilience includes many terms that I think of as a collective imaginary of utopian preparedness, a vision for a nation that is--in the parlance of the weather prediction community in which I work--weather ready. Through the filter of resilience, then, vulnerability (another problematic term) is eradicated through individual action, community engineering, and adherance to strategic policies like 100RC. Yet how does this image of NOLA, one of "mindful citizenry" engaged in "partnerships" around the city (terms used in their summary video), match with the realities of living in NOLA, today and in the everyday future?

Resilience is also a term widely critiqued in STS and the broader social science and humanistic disciplines. For good reason. Common questions in this literature: What counts as resilience? Who decides? At what costs? Resilience against what? What does resilience elide? How has the discourse of resilience reframed individual and community accountability? What is the political economy of resilience? I'm interested in the discourses of preparedness and planning, and "the eventness" of disaster, as Scott has highlighted many times. But my concern is not just to critique and tear down concepts like resilence (or vulnerability). I worry that we then evicerate common lexicons of hope and imaginaries of the future that do some good. How are we as field campus participants and those who re-envision or reveal the quotidian reflexive? How do we triage the Anthropocene amid our own state of compromise--as scholars, participants in Capitalism, in post colonialism, humans? What are our ethical commitments? How do we make good? 

Resilience is a term that is widely embraced by many in city management and planning. It holds the positive gloss not just of recovery but bouncing back better. To my ears, it has become one of many anthems of the Anthropocene, a kind of restrained tempo thrumming along through communities that will adapt to climate change (or seasonal-to-subseasonal climate variability post Trump). They will mitigate, innovate, transform, strategize in order to endure unanticipated shocks, both chronic and acute.

NOLA is one of 100 Resilient Cities named by the Rockefeller Foundation sometime in 2013. Like others selected across the globe, the city of New Orleans would benefit from the resources of a Chief Resilience Officer (CRO), an expert in resilience to be hired to work within city governance to develop a strategic plan; NOLA's was published in 2015. Selection of the cities for the "100 Resilient Cities" initiative was difficult, a competitive bid for resources based primarily on a city's recent experience with disaster, usually connected to a weather or climate extreme (e.g. hurricane, flood, etc). Resources were provided via the hierarchy of the CRO, sometimes to hire staff, develop training for the community, and create working groups and to write the stratetic plan. As one former directer of NOLA RC said of this opportunity provided by Katrina, the disaster that qualified NOLA for Rockefeller monies, it demonstrates the need for an the age of resilience. In what ways is resilience measured, accounted for, adjudicated and managed through or in spite of this strategic document? 

The language of resilience includes many terms that I think of as a collective imaginary of utopian preparedness, a vision for a nation that is--in the parlance of the weather prediction community in which I work--weather ready. Through the filter of resilience, then, vulnerability (another problematic term) is eradicated through individual action, community engineering, and adherance to strategic policies like 100RC. Yet how does this image of NOLA, one of "mindful citizenry" engaged in "partnerships" around the city (terms used in their summary video), match with the realities of living in NOLA, today and in the everyday future?

Resilience is also a term widely critiqued in STS and the broader social science and humanistic disciplines. For good reason. Common questions in this literature: What counts as resilience? Who decides? At what costs? Resilience against what? What does resilience elide? How has the discourse of resilience reframed individual and community accountability? What is the political economy of resilience? I'm interested in the discourses of preparedness and planning, and "the eventness" of disaster, as Scott has highlighted many times. But my concern is not just to critique and tear down concepts like resilence (or vulnerability). I worry that we then evicerate common lexicons of hope and imaginaries of the future that do some good. How are we as field campus participants and those who re-envision or reveal the quotidian reflexive? How do we triage the Anthropocene amid our own state of compromise--as scholars, participants in Capitalism, in post colonialism, humans? What are our ethical commitments? How do we make good? 

The author is Scott Gabriel Knowles and he works in the department of History and Politics at Drexel University. He focuses on disaster risks in cities, modern areas and public policy. He got his BA and MA in history at the University of Texas. He also got his PhD at John Hopkins University. He has written a book,  "The Disaster Experts: Mastering Risk in Modern America" (UPenn Press, 2011) as well as edited  "Critical Studies in Risk and Disaster" (UPenn Press, launch 2014).  He also is a member of Fukushima Forum collaborative research community and is currently co-writing a volume on the Fukushima disasters.

There are many websites and papers that cite this website due to the extensive amounts of data that are collected from this site. The website provides a lot of information and data based off health afflictions as a result of 9/11. Since this registry is the largest of its kind, data from it is pulled for numerous studies on 9/11 and its health effects. 

Rikers Island: The subject of this article, it's NYC's main jail complex. It is under scrutiny for poor living conditions of inmates.

Hailey-Means: Interviewed for this article, she was incarcerated in 2015 provides insight into the horribly smelly and toxic conditions she experienced. She is quoted and cited nearly 20 times about solitary and other aspects of the jail.

The New York Times: They were mentioned in the article as having published and spoken out against the violence and human rights issues at Rikers.  

Preet Bharara: US attorney for Southern District of NY who, as of 2014 planned to sue the city for abuse of inmates on the island.

Michael Bloomberg: His run as Mayor was cited when he announced the city's evacuation plan, which did not include a plan or route for Rikers island at all. 

Johnny Perez: A past detainee of Rikers who revealed the extreme temperatures that are reached inside cells and the jail itself. He is now workign to reduce the population and close the jail. He is also now part of the Urban Justice Center.

Susi Vassallo: Conducted temperature monitoring on Rikers Island. She is a professor at NYU med. She determined that the temperature extremes were a seriously health threat and unsafe. 

New York City Panel on Climate Change: Is cited in the article in order to show the extremes that temperature are expected to get by 2080, proving to be a complication for Rikers and it's inmates.  

Carvett Gentles: Another inmate who discusses the oven feeling of his cell and how he has fainted before due to it.

Omar Smith: Was incarcerated in 2014, he has had severe asthma that developed while at Rikers, coughing up blood is something that isn't new to him due to pollution in the area it is speculated. 

Bill de Blasio: Mayor of NYC, he is calling for reform of the jail and has allocated 200 million for upgrades and renovations for Rikers. 

Department of Corrections: Responsible for care and detention of inmates in NY state. In this article they acknowledge the need for improvements in the jail.

Freddie McGrier: Another inmate that was interviewed and confirmed atrociously hot temperatures inside the jail. He states his heart is affected as well as his migraines because of the heat.

Emergency response is addressed in different ways in this article. In terms of true emergency response during and immediately following the disaster, examples of emergency response can be seen in the recounting of those that were interviewed, but they weren't explicitly discussed in the article. The article does however extensively discuss aid that followed the disaster and discusses that aspect of emergency response, and more so the recovery and resiliency aspects of it. Such as government funding, aid relief, conditions in which things were left, hardships that those who survived came back and had to deal with, how medical care, socioeconomic factors and much more were highly effected post Katrina.

The data used to support the argument includes numerous publications by other authors providing information on the correlation between mental health and disasters. Background information on different disorders is also provided as well as interviews and case studies from patients and doctor as well as experts on the topic.