Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Andra Sonia Petrutiu
(Cornell University)
Martin Mahony (University of East Anglia)
Teresa Guadalupe de León Escobedo (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM))
Send message to Convenors
- Format:
- Combined Format Open Panel
Short Abstract:
This panel convenes around an interest in how climate data is being generated, circulated and used in the Global South. We collectively inquire into the sites of climatic knowledge production in the Global South and into the circulation of such knowledge between Northern and Southern geographies.
Long Abstract:
In a world threatened by climate change, climatic knowledges and models have gained a prominent role at the intersection between climate science and politics. This panel convenes around a shared interest in how climate data, computational and otherwise, is being generated, used and circulated in countries of the Global South. Framed by international epistemic-political power asymmetries, we collectively inquire into the sites of climatic knowledge-production in the Global South as well as into the circulation of such knowledge between Northern and Southern geographies. Such an endeavor inevitably centers the scientific, political and social networks through which institutions, scientists, data, models and money move, get transformed, and affect change.
The geographical imbalances in global climate science have been well-documented (Paasgard et al. 2015, Blicharska et al. 2017), and a small number of national case studies have shed light on the politics of climate knowledge infrastructures beyond the Global North (Mahony 2014, Hochsprung Miguel et al. 2019). Nonetheless, we contend that more needs to be done to better grasp the complex landscape of international climate science and the histories, politics and cultures that shape the making and using of climate data. Doing so can advance theory and practice in postcolonial and decolonial STS, and create spaces for STS scholars to engage in politically-salient work in a context increasingly defined by political urgency, severe imbalances of power, and environmental vulnerability.
In this Combined Format Open Panel, combining traditional paper presentations with roundtable discussion on the transformations our research might engender, we are interested in contributions addressing topics such as:
Climatic knowledge production in the Global South;
Climate science and the geopolitics of climate change;
Climate futures and civic epistemologies at the science-policy interface
Global geographies of Integrated Assessment Modelling;
Tensions between mitigation and adaptation research;
Collaborations between STS researchers and climate scientists ;
Accepted contributions:
Session 1Jean Carlos Hochsprung Miguel (University of Campinas)
Long abstract:
WMO conducts operations across 6 regions through the WMO Regional Associations, utilizing the efforts of their subsidiary bodies to implement specific outputs and activities at the regional level. These organizations play a crucial role in coordinating meteorological, hydrological, climatological, and related activities among their Members, with additional support from the WMO Regional and Representative Offices.
Despite these operational efforts, critical aspects such as institutional arrangements, research networks, and the intersection of climate science and policy remain largely unexplored in most of these regions. Recognizing the imperative to make climate science beneficial to society, the WMO currently lacks a comprehensive map of what can be termed "technopolitical territories of meteorology."
This research seeks to address this gap by presenting a detailed mapping of such territories in Brazil. By doing so, it aims to shed light on the intricate relationships and interfaces between meteorological science and policy, emphasizing the crucial role that Science and Technology Studies (STS) can play in offering valuable insights and contributions to the global discourse on climate sciences and policies.
Sara Kinell (ETH Zurich)
Long abstract:
With climate disasters portrayed as an issue of global concern, and artificial intelligence as a potent solution, international organizations turn to “Big Tech” for answers to the climate crisis. In this project, I inquire into the development, deployment, and appropriation of machine learning models in flood forecasting. First, I trace the evolution of the Early Warnings for All initiative and how it is co-produced (Jasanoff 2004) with histories of hydrology, (sustainable) development, and machine learning. I build on Edwards (2010) to identify how these initiatives embed asymmetrical visions of the global with climate disasters, and how these visions encode which nations that are capable of bringing about progressive transformation, and which ones that are subject to change (Decker and McMahon 2020; Bandopadhyay 2022). Second, I juxtapose these visions with the utility envisioned among developers of machine learning models for flood forecasting. I follow how these models are developed, by whom, and with what knowledge and data. Further, I trace how these models make their way from transnational technology corporations headquartered in the United States into new localities in the Global South through what I call “piloting.” Finally, I attempt to challenge the international epistemic-political power asymmetry and what Decker and McMahon (2020) refer to as the development episteme. I do so by drawing attention to vernacular sites (Greiner 2022) and processes for flood forecasting with non-scalable (Tsing 2012), situated epistemologies (Haraway 1988) and collaborative knowledge production.
Israel Agbogwe (University of Delta , Agbor Delta state , Nigeria) Ewere Clinton Okonta (Wellspring University) Philip Egbule (University of Delta, Agbor, Delta State, Nigeria)
Long abstract:
It is an indisputable truism that in a fragile and conflict-affected setting with limited governance, political instability and visionless leadership, communities are ill-equipped to cope with a changing climate and associated environmental hazards. Although there have been numerous discourses on climate change and the consequent environmental hazards, a call for proactive approach to halting the envisaged ruin is indispensable. This paper, therefore, is a clarion call on Africans to delve into their indigenous science systems for proactive approaches toward addressing the climate change crisis. Unfortunately, one major challenge that may likely bedevil this call is the erroneous belief that African traditional ideas and practices are fetish. This paper will argue that climate science, like other branches of knowledge, needs to be broadened and decolonized and that Africa should search within its knowledge systems for appropriate ideas and approaches to many of its development challenges. Also, it will examine how our growing vulnerability could be addressed through the collaboration of western science and environmental education with relevant African science. Additionally, this study will discuss how African researchers and their counterparts in the global north can tap into the vital and time-tested resources of the African indigenous science system. The effects of climate change and environmental hazards on the socio-economic activities of Africans will also be reviewed. However, it expresses optimism that indigenous knowledge and practice can contribute toward managing natural resources, environmental protection, and climate change adaptation in Africa. Possible ways of achieving these will be suggested in the full paper.
Teresa Guadalupe de León Escobedo (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM))
Long abstract:
The geographies of climate knowledge-making in the Global South remain largely underrepresented (Hochsprung & Mahony 2019). There is no sufficient understanding of the scientific and political dynamics in which poor countries, lacking climate knowledge infrastructures and under contradictory political landscapes develop their local climate research agenda. Even less well understood is how local scientific knowledge contributes to robust adaptation decision-making. This paper seeks to contribute to expanding this debate by looking at the case of Mexico.
This paper aims to discuss the performative role that Regional Climate Scenarios (RCS) have in the interface between climate science and policy in Mexico. I argue that despite the critiques that RCS has received due to its top-down scientific design and the assumption that they will lead to better adaptation policies (Dessai et al. 2009), these are powerful tools in geographies at the margin that allow us to grasp the local institutional and political conditions in which climate science and policy is being produced. As well as they allow us to see what research questions remain not being asked, the misleading climate political narratives, and the delayed adaptation policies. Through interviews with scientists and policymakers involved in RCS making, this paper unveils the scalar disjunctions between committing to the international climate agenda, having a contingent climate science production, and not knowing the climate vulnerabilities of the country. Thus, this case offers elements to illustrate the strategic environmental production of knowledge and ignorance that suit political contradictory ends (Parsons 2022).
Tiago Ribeiro Duarte (University of Brasília)
Long abstract:
This paper examines the climate science-policy interface in Brazil during the Bolsonaro government, which is widely known for its anti-environmentalist and denialist positions. To do so, I have interviewed key Brazilian climate scientists and policymakers and analyzed governmental documents. While in preceding administrations a scientific elite had regular interactions with climate policymakers and some scientists even took up policymaking positions, these interactions were significantly reduced during Bolsonaro´s administration. Furthermore, climate data produced by state research institutions were publicly criticized by the president and ministers. Yet this did not happen in a homogenous way across the government. For example, while the Ministry of the Environment virtually blocked all interactions between its members with the scientific community, the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation kept interactions with climate scientists, even if at a smaller extent than in previous administrations, and deployed mainstream climate data in official documents addressed to the UNFCCC. In this sense, this paper seeks to advance the argument that this interface should be understood as a heterogeneous space so that within the same administration the interactions between scientists and policymakers, as well as the flow of data from scientific institutions to the government (and vice-versa), greatly vary across different governmental institutions.
Abhigya A (Global Change Research Institute, Czech Academy of Sciences) Julia Leventon (Global Change Research Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences, CzechGlobe) Stephen Whitfield (University of Leeds)
Short abstract:
This paper looks into how the use of crop modelling shapes knowledge production and stakeholder participation, and vice versa in food systems transformations research in the Global South.
Long abstract:
In the policy discourse around the future of food systems in the Global South, crop modelling has come to be one of the key modes of knowledge production. In this paper we look at one such Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) that provides evidence to shape policies towards climate-smart nutrition security by modelling emissions, climate extremes, and trade and nutrition analysis. The given modelling framework promises to fill the lacunae in food systems assessments that rely overtly on mathematical models and are divorced from regional particularities. It combines models with in-country knowledge and ‘expert’ academic judgement from four countries in Southern Africa. Engagements with diverse stakeholders bring along distinctive inputs as well as competing knowledge claims that open up a space for questions such as: Which stakeholders are involved, who is considered an expert, what vantage points gain precedence in the decision-making process and what dictates these choices?
In this paper, we contribute to this conversation by looking into how the engagements between the modellers and stakeholders shape the normative choices, such as the definition of key drivers of food systems transformations and future scenarios of systems change. We consider how the use of the model shapes the participatory process, and vice versa. Further, we explore how policy agendas such as the UN Sustainable Development Goals influence these normative choices. Through this discussion, we unpack the knowledge claims made through the modelling framework and how these modes of knowledge production steer the conversation around food systems transformations and nutrition security.
vineet kumar (Delhi University)
Long abstract:
The production of knowledge related to climate change through scholarly publications is a critical aspect of understanding the complexity and challenges in South Asian countries such as India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Maldives and Bhutan. This abstract gives a bird’s eye view of knowledge production in terms of publications in the field of climate change within the region. It provides an overview of the trends in publication output related to climate change research areas across South Asian countries. It discusses the role of governmental policies and regulations, funding opportunities, role of academic institutions, and international collaborations in shaping the climate change research in these seven countries. It also gives an idea about the challenges and opportunities associated with climatic knowledge production through publications in South Asia.
The abstract discusses the implications of the findings for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners working in the field of climate change in South Asian countries. It emphasizes the importance of fostering a conducive environment for research and knowledge exchange to effectively address the challenges posed by climate change in the region.
Claudia Grisales (University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign)
Long abstract:
Deforestation data has been a key driver of environmental policy in Colombia since 2016. That year, deforestation rates rose dramatically after guerrilla rebels that exercised de facto forest control demobilized. In this post-conflict scenario, the Colombian government began implementing climate mitigation mechanisms funded by countries of the Global North. These mechanisms provide payments to counties in the Global South for verified emission reductions from deforestation prevention. However, their efficacy, as well as their effects in complex conflictive scenarios in the Global South require careful investigation.
Remote-sensing forest and carbon monitoring systems included in such initiatives have turned Colombia’s frontier areas into deforestation hotspots. In these lands, environmental policies meet complex socioenvironmental conditions shaped by historical inequalities and struggles. The subject of this paper is how deforestation data and information infrastructures are encountered and appropriated by grassroots peasant communities whose permanence in the ecologically strategic Amazon region is at stake.
By following deforestation data in the recent struggles of a grassroots peasant organization in Colombia, I look at the way deforestation data and infrastructures participate in the way contested categories like “peasant” and “conservation” are shaped. I also investigate the political imaginations at play in these struggles and the notions of just futures emerging from them. The paper uses ethnographic data collected through involved observation in the department of Guaviare, Colombia in 2023.
Andra Sonia Petrutiu (Cornell University)
Long abstract:
Drawing on ethnographic research, this paper analyzes the cultural politics of Indian climate modeling and the complex and emotional responses that my interview questions often provoked. In making sense of my research data, I am guided by the following questions: How and why do the technopolitics of climate modeling induce such intense emotional reactions? And, on a more general note, how is the affectual relationship between particular technologies and articulations of national interest and national identity constituted? I argue that there are two kinds of memories and experiences that have to be taken into account when trying to answer these questions and, by extension, to understand climate modeling in India. On the one hand, these are memories about Indian self-reliant development of particular technologies such as the nuclear program and supercomputing. This is India’s technopolitical history that frames the life and work of Indian climate modelers. On the other hand, there are more recent memories and experiences made by climate modelers in an uneven global epistemic economy that tell us something particular about Indian climate modeling which is not reducible to local history. Unpacking these complexities, I suggest, enables us to fathom the emotional dimensions of climate modeling in the Global South and to tackle the entanglements between technoscience, affect and national identity.