Search

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.

Paul Farmer is the chair of the Department of GLobal Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School. He is an expert in health care services and advocacy for those who are sick and in poverty. He doesn't appear to be situated in emergency response; he seems to be much more on the follow-up months or years later. Dr. Farmer has myriad publications of relevance to the Network, and his research foci are mostly regarding establishing high-quality health care in resource-poor environments. (http://ghsm.hms.harvard.edu/person/faculty/paul-farmer)

Bruce Nizeye works as the Chief of Infrastructure for PIH in Rwanda. It appears that his expertise is in physical constructs. I could not find how he was situated in emergency response, but it appears that he takes a role on the back side of disasters, much like Dr. Farmer. (http://www.pih.org/blog/the-voices-of-our-colleagues/)

Sara Stulac is an Associate Physician in the Division of Global Health Equity at BWH. She is also the Deputy Chief Medical Director for PIH. She seems to be an expert in pediatrics, specifically HIV care and prevention and oncology. Like her other authors mentioned on this page, she does not seem to be directly involved with emergency response. Her research foci are mostly not related to emergency response, but dealing with non-emergent pediatric care. (http://www.brighamandwomens.org/Departments_and_Services/medicine/servi…)

Salmaan Keshavjee is a professor at HMS and a physician at BWH. He has conducted research on post-Soviet Tajikistan's health transition and worked on an MDR-TB treatment program in Tomsk, Russia. Rather than emergency response, Dr. Keshavjee seems to be focused on epidemiology like his co-authors. He has a number of research foci including MDR-TB treatment and policy, health-sector reform in transnational societies, the role of NGOs in the formation of trans-border civil society, and "modernity, social institutions, civil society, and health in the Middle East and Central Asia. (http://ghsm.hms.harvard.edu/person/faculty/salmaan-keshavjee)