"The Affective Legacy of Silent Spring"
Alex Lockwood tries to measure the importance of Rachel Carson’s work in its affective influence on contemporary environmental writing across the humanities.
Alex Lockwood tries to measure the importance of Rachel Carson’s work in its affective influence on contemporary environmental writing across the humanities.
Stephen M. Gardiner discusses climate change, intergenerational ethics, and the convergence of problems which make climate change “a perfect moral storm.”
Walker focuses on uncertainty as a boundary device that shapes scientific ethos in crucial ways and negotiates a relationship between technical science and public deliberation.
In this special issue on Multispecies Studies, Thom van Dooren and Deborah Bird Rose attempt to dwell with the kinds of writing and thinking practices that we have been developing in their research in Hawai’i over the past seven years. Their aim is to develop “lively ethographies”: a mode of knowing, engaging, and storytelling that recognizes the meaningful lives of others and that, in so doing, enlivens our capacity to respond to them by singing up their character or ethos.
The authors develop “composting” as a metaphor for their two main arguments: that certain feminist concepts and commitments are foundational to the environmental humanities, and that more inclusive feminist composting is necessary for the future of the field.
This article tells the epic tale of the fall and rise of Mono Lake— the strange and beautiful Dead Sea of California—which fostered some of the most important environmental law developments of the last century.
Erin Ryan argues that environmental law is uniquely prone to federalism discord because it inevitably confronts the core question with which federalism grapples—who gets to decide?—in contexts where state and federal claims to power are simultaneously at their strongest.
In the United States, debate over the responsibilities of different levels of government are framed within our system of constitutional federalism, which divides sovereign power between the central federal administration and regional states. Dilemmas about devolution have been erupting in all regulatory contexts, but environmental governance remains uniquely prone to federalism discord because it inevitably confronts the core question with which federalism grapples—“who gets to decide?”— in contexts where state and federal claims to power are simultaneously at their strongest.
Full article by former RCC fellow Dominic Hinde.