Search

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?

Under OSHA Law, the employers must ensure their workers are in a safe workplace that does not contain any serious hazards according to the OSHA safety and health standards.

With the employers’ rights and responsibilities, OSHA has provided a list of methods to maximize the safe conditions within the workplace. For example, they have provided free Law Poster relevant to OSH Act for download and posting.

“Notify OSHA within 8 hours of a workplace fatality or within 24 hours of any work-related inpatient hospitalization, amputation or loss of an eye (1-800-321-OSHA [6742]).”

The central argument of the film is about the choice that needs to made upon with the emergency responders in a complex situation such as the lack of medical service within the country. The choices include which patient gets helped and which one are not with the lack of material supplies and the medical technology available. Or making choices if MSF member continues to stay in such condition to assist the locals getting medical treatment.

1. Patients: to get access with digital and gamified mental health assessments to diagnose themselves and gain self-awareness. After assessment, the patient might want get to a talk with the health professionals to have an ideal solution to the problem. Even by not getting frequent contacts with health professionals, the patients still can track their own health status with the system.
2. Providers: will receive patients’ data and recorded into a dashboard data to view the profiles more efficiently. The dashboard function also allows the track on the history and current progress. Relevant assessment also can be send out to the patients regularly in order to assist both provider and patients to understand the situation more clearly.
3. Organizations: organizations might include from a range of primary care center to hospital emergency room, with the data obtained from the patient, coordinated care can be provided. It is also a great tool to analysis the patients and form a study.

The vulnerable populations have addressed in this policy are the populations affected by the environmental contamination. “While the actor-survivors were dying a slow, painful, convulsive death… The contaminated water was collected but the “victims” died.”