Paper short abstract:

A transnational entangled history could connect and balance the positive and negative master narratives. Three challenges for such a history: (1) connections to (neo)colonial histories, (2) going beyond anthropocentric history and (3) debunking 'newness' and linearity.

Paper long abstract:

The two master narratives, a positive signaling the improved quality of life, and a negative one focused on environmental degradation and social injustice are two sides of the same coin. Focusing on just one side gives a false understanding of developments i.e. a gain without pain and a loss without revenues. To connect these developments could be studied as one entangled history. For this a transnational focus is needed that crosses national and continental boundaries. In doing so it encounters (neo)colonial histories. These are sensitive and often politicized literatures and navigating them requires a plurality of voices and viewpoints. A transnational approach can show positive and negative effects of the whole socio-technical system. This could unpack the mechanisms that caused these demeaning practices and environmental effects in various places. Secondly, such history could stretch the boundaries including transnational commons and non-human agents. It can show how exploitation of commons changed environments and how environmental systems adapted, were resilient and relapsed. Attention to these phenomena signal that history continues beyond anthropocentric developments and the contemporary is not a ‘final chapter’. A final challenge is to debunk the linear nature and ‘newness’ entrenched in both narratives. These obscure histories of temporal decline and revival. Thinking cyclical also opens questions about historic ideas about and beyond a ´end of life´ narrative – what happens after disposal, destruction, extinction? Attention to the whole system can shed light on shifting practices, resilience, niche practices, revivals and resistance that can inform rethinking of contemporary arrangements.