AoS Week 2: Climate Change and the Anthropocene by Catherine Dolan

AoS Week 2: Climate Change and the Anthropocene by Catherine Dolan https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so Please post your ideas, questions, comments on the issues brought up by the weekly readings here. en-us 2021-09-29 17:44:05 UTC 2021-10-16 17:12:24 UTC hello@padlet.com https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1794074241 Before I read this article, I didn't have a clue how integral oil and gas production is to the Norwegian economy -- and how much of a pollutant it is. I fell privy to the commonplace stereotype Noorgard writes about: a conceptualization of the Norwegian people as nature loving, peaceful, and simplicity-orientated. What's really struck such a chord with me is the author's discussion of the tools of order and innocence, fears about security, and the "we have suffered" narrative. My fieldwork and research is in Palestine, and all these phenomena are so overwhelmingly present in Israeli culture to cover up/ justify/ avoid discussion of the Israeli genocide of Palestine. The tools of avoidance discussed in this article very concisely and poetically describe what strikes me as a profound aspect of the human condition: our ability to avoid culpability for our own wrongdoings at all costs. I'm happy I read this article, and grateful for the light it has shed on my area of research -- as well as on this area of study and what I've learned w/r/t climate denial in Norway.
695166]]> 2021-10-05 18:27:59 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1794074241 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1799252484 Sophie Ferretti (694981)
I found Moore’s section on fisheries in the Bahamas to be very relevant. Moore explains that the reef health in the Bahamas is degrading, which puts the country at risk of not obtaining the MSC certification. This could be a potential issue as consumers now demand a “sustainable stamp” from imported seafood. As Moore notes, it is indeed ironic that international commodity chains are valuing sustainability while supporting commercial fishing and the mass consumption of marine products. It is also ironic that it is the local population that would suffer if the fisheries were not able to acquire the MSC certification and lose connection to important markets in Europe or the US, especially when it is not them who hold the main responsibility for the loss of the marine biodiversity. Factors such as pollution, land-use changes, increasing touristic activity can instead be held more accountable for the poor reef health of the islands.

Moreover, the concept of the MSC “sustainable stamp” made me recall that it was also addressed by the documentary Seaspiracy. The documentary talks about how the majority of the MSC’s income comes from their logo licencing on seafood, “the more blue ticks they handed out, the more money they made”. This makes me wonder whether this certification is actually “sustainable” and if consumers in large markets such as Europe and the US are aware of this when paying so much attention to purchasing seafood with this stamp.

]]> 2021-10-07 09:37:52 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1799252484 6948241 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1799431050 Li Yunshan(694824)
I found Roberts and Parks' discussion about the fossil economy quite impressive. It's crucial to notice that when the minority decided what the majority's life would be, there is a reflection of inequality which we should take more consideration in practice.

But I have a question towards the data of Roberts and Parks, referring that "in the early early 21st century, the poorest 45% of the human population accounted for 7% of emissions, while the richest 7% produced 50%". There is the case that many developed countries built factories and hired domestic workers in developing countries to save cost, so the burden of CO2 emission shifted to developing countries. Who should be responsible for these emissions?

]]> 2021-10-07 11:21:34 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1799431050 6948241 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1799466417 Li Yunshan (694824)
I watched the inspiring film The Anthropologist, and was astonished to see how climate change has affected people's life. For many of us, it might seem a foreign story, but this film help me reflect the environmental destruction of my hometown, a small city in northern China, whose economy growth rely heavily on coal mining. Many section of road above the tunnel collapse and the air is bad. And who can tell that this village used to be famous for its cultural heritage, the Confucian culture? Climate change has different embodiment in different locations, but there's no reason not accepting the truth. ]]> 2021-10-07 11:40:40 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1799466417 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1800137879 Anita Lateano 694963
Like Sophie's comment above, I found Moore's commentary around MSC certification really interesting. It made me question the value of things that small coastal communities, like this one in the Bahamas have, and how their value is dictated by the global north. Their lobster, for example, is only valuable when it has the MSC certification, which only then makes it desirable in the US. This transfer of power, into what is valuable and what isn't no longer comes from the people who farm, source or produce these products, it's dictated by NGOs, government legislation, third parties, and arbitrary tick-box exercises - to get this 'approval' for it to be suitable to market.

MSC certification was now necessary she said, ‘so we can continue to sell to Walmart’, registering the irony that the promotion of sustainable fisheries is increasingly central to international commodity chains linking large-scale commercial fishing and the mass consumption of marine products.

This idea is continued further on when Moore mentions the 'sustainable tourism destination' as an emergent product appearing alongside the postcolonial paradise method of tourism. Once again, local nature, be it food source, or a place itself, is turned into a commodity through western narratives and western demand. The agency in deciding what and how things are valued is being taken from the community.

]]> 2021-10-07 15:07:59 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1800137879 Should we redefine environmental 'privilege'? https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1800438295 Anita Lateano 694963

This piece made me think about the word 'privilege', especially as it's being used much more in recent years, with the rise of 'woke' culture.

Even when the impacts of global warming are apparent, Noorgard writes "Yet the people I spoke with in Bygdaby played a critical role in legitimizing the status quo by not talking about global warming even in the face of late winter snow and a lake that never froze." It really makes me question the connotations of the word privileged. To me, the world privilege makes it feel like something aspirational, but as Noorgard concludes, even this environmentally privileged community experience complex feelings of guilt, responsibility and hopelessness.

What would be the impact if it were changed to something with more negative connotations, for example, the 'environmentally ignorant' - would this spark more action and change?

I'd be interested in what other people thought about the term, and if there are any other researchers looking into the environmentally privileged.. as Noorgard writes: Nearly all environmental justice research highlights the experiences of groups who are structurally oppressed rather than those who are structurally privileged. ]]> 2021-10-07 16:45:45 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1800438295 6550441 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1800532201 It is interesting that Malm & Hornberg see the Anthropocene as an ‘analytically flawed’ narrative that inhibits action, and as a perceived threat to the social sciences, since it is being driven by natural scientists. I think I’d rather adopt Latour’s more positive view that the Anthropocene is a ‘gift for anthropology because it recognizes that human activity is having a geological impact on the earth’. The Anthropocene narrative opens the door for a contemporary anthropological activism. Nigel Jeffery 655044@soas.ac.uk

]]> 2021-10-07 17:22:37 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1800532201 Comment on Sophie & Anita's posts 6550441 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1800575855 I agree, MSC labeling is likely to be problematic as a 'sustainable stamp' and that as well as over-fishing by local fishers, pollution, land-use and increased tourism are also contributing to poor reef health and loss of bio-diversity. However, whilst acknowledging the need for socio-ecological justice, I'm going to stand up for the lobster, whose rights are not mentioned at all in this paper!]]> 2021-10-07 17:40:32 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1800575855 6550441 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1800587490 the comment on Sophie & Anita's post above is by Nigel Jeffery 655044@soas.ac.uk]]> 2021-10-07 17:45:21 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1800587490 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1803346080 I found this article extremely interesting.
The ecological changes that can be seen in the Bahama's are a direct result of its tourism industry or export. However it is the Bahamian population that will have to face the burden of the economic and ecological fragility that is a direct result of them. The ones who are both historically and currently responsible for climate change are also the ones who rarely face the direct repercussions of this.
Regarding the discussion surrounding the MSC certification of lobsters. The emphasis on the appearance of sustainability by companies like Walmart rather than adopting practices that are actually sustainable is something that we see repeatedly.
(Mahira Dasgupta, 695001)

]]> 2021-10-08 21:30:48 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1803346080 Put the focus on the real causes and avoid generalization https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1803372768 Mathew W. Banseh 694947
I really found the arguments of Malms and Hornborg against the Anthropocene approach to sustainability very insightful and intriguing. I was among those Malms and Hornborg describe as having swallowed the approach of Anthropocene "lock, stock and barrel" since I used to equate population growth to environmental destruction. This intriguing article has demonstrated with figures that it is not the case because the rate of population increase has no correlation with the rate of increase of emissions and as the authors argued " if a correlation is negative, causation is out of the question". the focus should therefore be on natural scientists and the few who use this field to exploit our environment. ]]> 2021-10-08 22:05:42 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1803372768 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1804312666 On page 35 of this article, the author highlights the importance of anthropologists within Anthropocene discourse, which is called “anthropological engagement” that makes locals’ voices articulate to the international policy-making field. However, I was thinking is there any possibility that anthropologists could be one of the conspirators who suppress the locals' point of view?

Compare to the week one essential reading, Lewis and Brightman 2017, which depicts the negation of local perspectives from the policy-making context, it seems Moore’s attitude towards anthropological contributions tends to be more optimistic.
(Posted by Yueh-Chou; SOAS ID: 693655)]]> 2021-10-09 16:47:36 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1804312666 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1804837415 I think Rudiak-Gould makes an important case for not forcing familiar (industrial) blame narratives of climate change onto communities like those in the Marshall Islands. Their self-blaming tendencies could be a valuable exemplar, because personal accountability can potentially spur more immediate climate change mitigation action in a way that corporate culpability may not. But I wonder if industrial vs universal blame is a false dichotomy, and if so, could greater good be achieved by recognising both narratives? For example, where possible, boycotting an environmentally-destructive company and/or industry (e.g. palm oil) could be a form of individual action (reducing one’s own consumption) with a view to creating wider change, provided other individuals adopt a similar approach? (Zareena Khan 695806)]]> 2021-10-10 03:57:36 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1804837415 Yasmine Ghorayeb (694518) https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1805056540 This reading made me think about the extent to which the rest of the world is complicit in reinforcing the view of “Mythic Norway.” From my experience living in Lebanon, I have witnessed how members of my community may regard themselves as heavily complicit in the climate crisis— albeit contributing very little relative to people living in the global North— yet still insist on exonerating countries like Norway and considering them as inspirational models of sustainability.

What I find particularly interesting in the case of Lebanon is the complete absence of the kinds of ’tools of order’ and ‘tools of innocence’ Noorgaard refers to in the Norwegian context. On the one hand, the default position of people living in Lebanon is ontological instability— our own government accidentally blew up our city last year, injuring thousands and releasing tons of ammonium nitrate into the atmosphere. Perhaps acknowledging the impact of our environmentally detrimental practices isn’t necessarily difficult because we don’t feel secure in the first place. On the other hand, I would argue that there are ‘tools of culpability,’ as opposed to ’tools of innocence.’ There’s a strong awareness that the Lebanese state is responsible for environmental degradation because this impact is clearly visible in everyday life (from piles of garbage lining the streets to the deafening sound of generators). But there’s also a sense that the community is forced into environmentally destructive practices a result of state negligence. Some common questions citizens ask themselves include: “How can we stop using cars or taxis if we don’t have a public transportation system?” “How can we cut down on generator fumes when the state doesn’t provide us with electricity?” ]]> 2021-10-10 08:36:43 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1805056540 who/where/why/how https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1805085814 The Anthropocene displacement - human nature, as opposed to natural nature - is an interesting development posited by Malm and Hornberg. They argue towards a sociogenic insight, rather than working through the rhetoric of the biological evolution of human beings.

'Probing the depths of social history' would bare some insight on social relations and how they've shaped the current crisis of climate change and the shift from human values and ethics to financial values. We therefore need anthropologists to study these correlates alongside natural scientists to unveil differentiated vulnerabilities due to free market hierarchies whilst taking into account local issues when it comes to policy making. Humans are having an impact on the earth, but who, where and how are all important social contexts which should be taken into account. Sarah 683385

]]> 2021-10-10 09:08:46 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1805085814 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1805141670 In this article, Rudiak-Gould explains how there exist two major blame stances within the climate change debate: that taken by indigenous activists and favoured by many anthropologists, which places blame on industrial societies and argues that those most effected by climate change are those who contribute least to it (industrial blame), and that which is favoured by scientists and politicians in the ‘Global North’ which argues that climate change is man-made and global, and requires worldwide culpability (universal blame). However, the focus of this article, the Marshallese Islanders, flip these blame-beliefs on their head. These low-lying island inhabitants blame themselves for climate change, and seemingly counter-intuitively ignore the fact that their contribution to the issue is negligible. This article shows that victimisation and agency are not mutually exclusive concepts, and that, despite being victims of climate change in scientific terms, Marshallese Islanders do not need to allow ‘industrialised’ societies to fix the problem they created. Instead, they gain agency through victimising themselves, and through this are able to invoke positive change. Perhaps if the ‘Global North’ took a similar stance, with individuals taking accountability and becoming victims themselves, the global fight against climate change would be more effective. (658729) ]]> 2021-10-10 10:04:39 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1805141670 iolikaryka https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1805189868 Malms and Hornborg's arguments on the Anthropocene origin's were extremely accurate in my opinion. Yes, climate change arose from the human species but is this specific enough? As Anna Tsing comments the term is contentious, not all humans have the same amount of responsibility for the environmental crisis but everyone is 'anthropos'. The blame has turned towards the wrong side in my understanding, I would like to delve more into the approach of Capitalocene and Chthulucene. However, maybe the broadness of the term 'Anthropocene' is useful in climate change activism as, although not all of humanity caused the problem, the term could be galvanizing, as it shows us our collective responsibility to the environment. - Ioli 695883]]> 2021-10-10 10:57:08 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1805189868 Marshallese Islanders as an example https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806012779 I find Marshallese's islanders approach extremely admirable. Climate change was mainly caused by certain parties, but at this point of urgency would it make sense for the islanders to just point fingers and throw tantrums (even if they have all the rights of doing so)? With their approach of doing what they can to improve the situation, they are setting a good example for the rest of the world, especially for the global North and parties that have cause the problem in the first place. Elena (695342)]]> 2021-10-10 20:06:58 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806012779 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806188812 _{I found interesting Moore's observation about the relationship between sustainability and tourism: although tourism is the source of environmental destruction in the Bahamas (as it is elsewhere) the tourism industry (both foreign developers and local actors such as the Ministry of Tourism) have transformed environmental awareness in a "tourist product" (31). Also, what does sustainability look like? Is it the postcard image of "private, segregated enclaves" or the "dense settlements" where Bahamians look after each other? (Elena R)}]]> 2021-10-10 22:48:54 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806188812 687127 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806221245 I agree with Malm and Hornborg that there are indeed lifeboats for the rich and the privileged (if human species is an abstraction, are there multiple "species" within humankind, based on wealth and privilege?).
Will race/gender and class dictate who will stay behind and bear the consequences of anthropogenic climate change while the privileged will escape ( Elon Musk: "History is going to bifurcate along two directions. One path is we stay on Earth forever, and then there will be some eventual extinction event. The alternative is to become a spacefaring civilization and a multi-planet species"). Or, as Anna Tsing says "getting a rocket ship and going to live in another planet after we trashed ours" is not a solution for anybody, not even the wealthiest as humankind won't be able to survive in isolation? (Elena Ruiu 687127)]]> 2021-10-10 23:24:45 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806221245 As I finished reading Malms and Hornborg, I was left with a question if the ‘Anthropocene’ developed from an ideology into a deftly packaged tool to (rightfully) market climate change anxiety. And then I read Moore’s introduction that used the phrase ‘a political label designed to call attention to this change’. Another striking statement that stood out in the early part of the essay was Moore’s reflection on the people of the Bahamas and others asking, “What kinds of stories do experts and laypeople tell in order to locate themselves in global change narratives and enroll others in planning for change?” I felt this to be a strong motivation to explore the climate change conversations happening in the larger media and internet spaces to understand the discourses being deployed by different factions and to understand the impact of these media-led clarion calls. The concept of 'ecobiopolitics' (Olson, 2010) is very interesting in this context as well because of the focus on the socio-political efforts to highlight anthropogenic impact. The argument of the non-uniformity of Anthropocene demands that indigenous programmes and community-led interventions require a local context and therefore, a local, native ‘call-to-action’. As suggested by Moore later in the article, the Anthropocene is an outcome of the positive feedback cycle of ideas of climate change. It is important therefore that this positive feedback cycle translates further down to contextual local action policies and initiatives. Moore highlights this later while speaking of 'attention to design'. (Posted by Kavita Natarajan; SOAS ID 694599) https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806933338 2021-10-11 07:44:07 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806933338 If, as Malm and Hornborg say that scholars advocating for the Anthropocene ideology are against continuing with capitalism ‘business-as-usual’ then can the Anthropocene concept be used to create any active good or does it, by just grouping all humankind into one species, ensure the blameless are being, by default, blamed, and the culprits are allowed to carry on ‘business-as-usual’? https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806941345 686945]]> 2021-10-11 07:48:23 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806941345 695210 695210 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806979512 Oftentimes, as Westerners, we—or I—look upon Nordic countries as very progressive in terms of sustainability, climate change, and green activism. I fell for the “Mythic Norway” propaganda. I am sorry to admit that I was surprised at the willful indifference of this particular Norwedigan community from this reading—an indifference they had the privilege to have. What surprised me most was that it was more of an indifference instead of ignorance. They were aware of our deteriorating climate issues but chose to not see it as a problem. But this made me think back to my own country the US (which the reading points out as being notably apathetic) and recognize that although so many countries in the Global North are different in their approaches to climate change (be it ignorance, apathy, or full-out denial) each country in the Global North is guilty of manipulating the conversation for our own country’s benefit, creating a mentality in which we are devoid of blame or just ignoring the problem and hoping it goes away. Norgaard explains that “the construction of denial and innocence” are the two ingredients that allow this mentality to prosper—a lack of responsibility by Western nations and with it a self-created innocent identity. This idea is definitely the common mentality in the countries that are most responsible for the climate crisis. ]]> 2021-10-11 08:09:48 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806979512 The flaws of the anthropocene that Malm and Hornborg unpicked in their argument were insightful. Their argument made me consider for the first time the 'anti-social' tendencies of the anthropocene. The fact that the fossil economy was not caused and is not maintained equally by the population is not new (as mentioned in last week's reading) however as Malm and Hornorg point out, even the very definition of the anthropocene points to a universal human species evolution. Their argument adds further support to the idea that we need to think in terms of socio-nature rather than seperate parts. Malaika 684973 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806983031 2021-10-11 08:11:48 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806983031 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806990805 https://www.geosociety.org/gsatoday/archive/26/3/article/i1052-5173-26-3-4.htm]]> 2021-10-11 08:15:43 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1806990805 anthropogenic /sociogenic https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807066611 Having read Malm and Hornborg's piece first, I found myself replacing the word ‘anthropogenic’ by ‘sociogenic’ in my head every time it popped up in Moore’s text (almost 30 times). It was a useful exercise. I believe the term 'sociogenic' (proposed by Malm and Hornborg) is better suited to account for the asymmetric distribution of resources and power that is at the core of the emergence and endurance of the fossil fuel economy.

María José Jordán (685585)

]]> 2021-10-11 08:54:04 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807066611 Distribution of Fairness Responsibility https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807133612 After reading Malms & Horborg, I can understand that the potential catastrophe due to climate change is multi-factors. Some humans bear more responsibilities of making the causes, however the effects are deemed to all mankind, non-human, and environment. I think reinforcement of law and policies in respective country is utterly important to keep the distribution of responsibility fair, aim for the greater goods, create good governance. - Surya (694529)]]> 2021-10-11 09:30:08 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807133612 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807279807 One aspect of the reading I found quite interesting to think about was about the weight of ecological responsibility different people/ nations etc carry for climate change. A large part of the discussion on the topic is about who will be most affected, and it is widely acknowledged that those who have the least negative ecological impact and the global poor will be those most affected by climate change. The term sustainability is somewhat a fallacy, as sustaining what has happened and what is happening is not possible without leading to further destruction, and seems to be a blanket term, which leads to greenwashing and prevents actual change and policy that could help. This allows those least affected by climate change to continue to think they are having an impact by buying sustainably sourced products etc, without thinking too hard about their actions and those who would be most impacted (for example, Ben Shapiro’s infamous assertion that those who live on coastlines and are at risk of losing their homes to rising sea levels can just sell their homes and move, without considering whether there may not be anyone to sell said homes to, nor the funds to move elsewhere). Nordic countries are seen as advanced and pioneering in sustainability, but this article has lead me to believe this may simply be the result of excellent PR. Norway (and other affluent nations) are educated and informed, but privilege enables them to feel separate from the real impact of climate change.

Georgia Colgrave 685469 ]]> 2021-10-11 10:52:28 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807279807 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807294539 I find it interesting that the reading shows Marshall Islanders adopting a "self blame" approach to climate change. I would perceive it as self responsibility. Even though they are aware of themselves being smaller than other countries they do see how they are harming the environment as a community and discuss a proactive approach on how it can be resolved. I think it is an evolved way of thinking about climate change. I also liked the teachers example about drawing on a white canvas and no matter how small your drawing is it still has an impact on the bigger picture. Vedika (695002)]]> 2021-10-11 11:01:04 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807294539 Cultural Constructions of Person Responsibility and Sustainability https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807345496 I found many parallels from the constructed sustainable self in the Norwegian cultural conscious as I do in my home state of California. Californians often identify themselves as "Californians"-separate from the "American" cultural signifier that might attach them to U.S. imperialism, or outsized impact on global climate change. Its self-serving of course, but we are also shaped to believe that we live in a state that values its natural environment-we are provided fodder to help ease guilt and help us deal with the realities of Climate Change that face us on a yearly basis in the form of a nearly 7 month fire season. In reality, California has an agricultural economy that has completely reshaped the topography of the state, emptied its largest lakes and has left the destruction of indigenous food systems in its wake. 4 of the five most polluted cities in the US sit in Californias bread basket, the San Joaquin Valley. I also believe that it is apparent in both the case of both Norway and California, there is a sort of purposefully constructed distance between the Rural and the urban where the decisions are made to pump oil or serve corporate economic interests over environmental interests. It serves the interest of the individual who may be able to feign responsibility with a statement like, "I only worry about the things I can control" as seems to be the case for absolving oneself of guilt attached to oil production and privilege in Rural Norway, and perhaps the ability of people in "liberal enclaves" like San Francisco to detach their own privilege from something like the subjugation of farm laborers to plantation industrial agriculture systems. 687088]]> 2021-10-11 11:31:15 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807345496 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807367012 I find myself agreeing with much of what Malms & Hornborg have questioned in their paper; particularly that is it the specific social and cultural relationships that a minority of humankind have developed with their growing use of fossil fuels and energy consumption that is a necessary frame to the climate change discussions today. From my understanding, this frame for climate change then places the responsibility of change and sustainability on the privileged minority as opposed to the anthropocentric framework which places responsibility on humankind as a whole. Whilst the points made by Malms & Hornborg are extremely insightful, I question then how then we approach solutions for sustainable futures as a privileged minority. Culturally and socially, how would our relationship with fossil fuels have to shift, and who has the power to do this – the individual? Companies?
(Roshni 637370)

]]> 2021-10-11 11:43:39 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807367012 Geostories: A Rhetorical Argument for the Anthropocene https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807417425 Moore's analysis of the rhetorical use of the term 'Anthropocene' forces to rethink the way in which international organizations like the IPCC frame the issue of climate change. The argument that I find particularly interesting from an anthropological perspective is where she argues that "an attention to narrative may appear to abandon a commitment to material processes, I argue that such stories help constitute ecologies and socialities by bringing them into new kinds of socioecological and ecobiopolitical (earthly) relation." Defining the Anthropocene as being an 'era' where human species-being impact their natural environment in an unprecedented way doesn't entail that we understand the human species-being as being one single political or even cultural entity. Rather, this argument shows the multiple ways in which we seem to 'naturalise' our (social, political, cultural and economical) relation to our natural environment. Acknowledging the anthropological relevance of these geostories also constitutes the first step to an anthropology of sustainability. (694741)]]> 2021-10-11 12:10:18 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807417425 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807442410 Malm and Horborg highlight a really interesting point about environmental privilege and the differentiated vulnerability on all scales of human society concerning the impact of climate change. The Anthropocene accepts that culture is an entity that has the ability to manipulate and alter nature. However, this assumes that individuals have equal agency to alter nature. The Anthropocene has a tendency to perpetuate racial bias by ignoring race and providing an exclusionary white view.
Amy, 694871.

]]> 2021-10-11 12:22:05 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807442410 Anna Lewis-Workman 695065 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807465930 I found the Noorgard article incredibly well written and provocative, forcing us to face some uncomfortable realities of the psychology of sustainability. But that being said I would have loved for her to say a bit more about what this means for privileged communities (or even countries) that are not as isolated as Bygdaby. I see the connections she is drawing between the attitudes and tendencies towards climate denial or ambivalence in other western countries and I agree with her that the study in Bygdaby reaches conclusions that are applicable to other places of environmental privilege. But I didn't feel that she touched enough on how in many ways their degree of isolation in the sense that they are a rural community that doesn’t seem to pay too much attention to world news is a bit of an extenuating circumstance, I feel this clouds the parallels she draws.

]]> 2021-10-11 12:31:56 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807465930 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807472697 Something that struck me from Malm and Hornborg's review is the relationship between the growth of capitalism and climate change. Whilst they briefly talk about this in their extract and it not being their core basis of their argument. The evidence of the 'richest 7% [of the human population] produced 50% of emissions' compared to 'the poorest 45% of the human population accounted for 7% of emissions'. Is it fair to say that the growth in capitalism and individual wealth has led to the increase in climate change?
Rammiyan, 696524.]]> 2021-10-11 12:34:48 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807472697 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807472880 From my personal research the last few years, it became apparent to me that the perpetuation of social injustices were primarily due to a lack of empathy and/or ignorance (the former fuelling the latter of vice versa has been argued).

This was a refreshing read, as it allowed me to self assess my preconceptions and social constructions in this area: ‘In today’s globalised risk society such perceptions of near and far, immediate or abstract are politically charged social constructions.’

I was also really intrigued, however not surprised, by the ramifications of normalising climate change and its cause of transnational privilege.

695875

]]> 2021-10-11 12:34:53 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807472880 simultaneously disturbing and invisible https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807497169 I found Noorgard's paradox that climate change is both disturbing and invisible extremely powerful. I suppose it goes against this idea that because Norwegians have a generally good quality of life and are in many ways privileged, they should tackle climate change issues from a place of safety and security. instead, those for whom climate change is not invisible are the ones dealing with its effects and consequences. (685899)]]> 2021-10-11 12:44:02 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807497169 The Nature of the word Anthropocene https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807523323 Eliza Hamer 686948
Malm and Hornburg's strong approach to the word 'anthropocene' is insightful. They point to a universal culture and nature, and universal climate change, places and people. "The ‘Anthropocene’ registers this moment of epiphany: the power to shape planetary climate has passed from nature into the realm of humans."

Humans as an all encompassing term- This highlights the potential bias in the definition of the word anthropocene and the role that environmental/ social/ racial/geographical/ economical plays to privilege when dealing with climate change. Is climate change a collective responsibility and a universal term or does it bring to the foreground the realities of differentiated vulnerability on all scales of human society?

]]> 2021-10-11 12:53:37 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807523323 Prioritising and identifying the biggest contributors towards CO2 emission beyond region / geography would be an interesting exploration https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807682698 The percentage breakdown of CO2 emissions, shared on Pg 3 focuses on the regional split. This got me thinking about the industry-wise breakdown of contributors. “Industry-wise” could include projects that range from “wants” to “needs”.* For instance, where does a global sport like Motor racing fit into this dialogue of CO2 emission contributors? Motor racing as a bucket includes over 50-100 different types of racing across automobiles. It’s not fossil fuel being burnt for need-focussed travel, instead, I’d like to go on a limb and say its for pure leisure and entertainment. (*The question of what’s a need vs want in this space of contributors is worth debating over)

Harish Subu 695003]]> 2021-10-11 13:43:41 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807682698 https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807748404 There was so much to take away from this piece, and I found myself especially reflecting on 'Norway is small' as a justification for their lack of action on climate change. I felt that it spoke directly to a lot of discussions on individual action, where people justify a lack of action on climate change because, after all, what difference can one person make (e.g. what use is it for me to stop using plastic bags when most ocean pollution is created by the fishing industry)? Whilst this is definitely a relevant point, the article caused me to reflect on the fact that this might actually be a 'tool of innocence' to let myself off the hook individually, especially as a direct recipient of environmental privilege (having grown up in the UK). This is a somewhat unfinished thought, but I appreciate that Noorgard reinforces the need to be critical of our own position within debates on climate change. (695716)]]> 2021-10-11 14:04:05 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1807748404 Inequality in Anthropocene https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1808923470 I recommend this book by anthropologist Jason Hickel, his work on inequality and "development" were really useful for my understanding of responsibility within carbon emission and environmental changes by some "anthros" proposed by Malms and Hornborg. Interesting that Yasmine (694518) referred to him as well in response to Li Yunshan (694824). ]]> 2021-10-11 22:45:55 UTC https://padlet.com/cd171/cdvekrkrvi57h8so/wish/1808923470