Search

I am currently in the process of transitioning my M.A. level course on Science, Technology, and Development with 11 students to virtual instruction. One of my interests in engaging with COVID-19 is to examine how it (should) informs development ideologies and practices. How should students of development studies retool -- conceptually, methodologically, practically -- in wake of the pandemic?

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?

Newark's air is polutted from the factories and warehouses the most. Also, Newark's port is surrounded by factories and use of toxic gases. I think the air pollution in Newark impacts the residents of Newark and the surrounding cities as well. Air Pollution causes lots of diseases.

Hurricane Sandy impacted the community by distroying homes and landscapes. The Red Cross's decision to give out $310M as a recovery of the Hurricane is such a great way to step on solving such a vulnerabilitial hazard. Hurricane Sandy impacted buildings and lives, including children who lost their homes. Having a fund for the recovery of such an event is a great way to help people who lost their homes or beloved ones. Government started to help the hurricane victims right after the Hurricane by providing them homes or food. However, I believe that having a fund for recovery will be more flixable to help the hurrican victims. Lots of families lost family members in the hurrican. The Red Cross is helping with money, which cannot bring lives back. However, I believe that I is relieving to just think about those victims and consider them in the plan as well. There also lots of organizations were helping with the recovery form Hurricane Sandy by providing volunteers to build up houses and volunteers to make children recover from the event by providing performing arts. $310M fund will help those organizations do their job of building houses and bring kids' spirits back.

In the College of New Jersey Hurrican Sandy oral history, The oral collected some information about residents affected by Hurricane Sandy in New Jersey. All the stories about the effects of such a hazard include all groups and classes of people, such as poor or rich, young and old, and families and single people. Hurrican Sandy's damages were distributed among all groups of people, by destroying houses, drowning people, and lost of electricity and water for days and months. This oral history shows the different stories and events of all the different groups that were affected really bad in the Hurrican