Critical Research Ethics as Decolonial Praxis

In the comment “Critical Research Ethics as Decolonial Praxis” Rosa Cordillera A. Castillo emphasises the importance of critical research ethics in decolonial praxis within academia, highlighting the harmful effects of irresponsible and extractive scholarship that perpetuates epistemic violence and injustice by disregarding non-Western epistemologies, knowledge-makers, agency, and history. The author argues that confronting the embeddedness of knowledge production in imperial, colonial, and patriarchal ideologies, practices, and histories is crucial for engaging in a rehumanising and redistributive academic praxis. June Rubis continues the discussion, pointing out the limitations of superficial attempts to decolonise academic institutions, which often exclude Indigenous voices and fail to confront ongoing colonial violence. She suggests that a more meaningful decolonial project requires remaking relationships towards liberatory justice, including ethical collaboration and accountability with the communities researchers work with. Antony George Pattathu concludes that decolonial praxis and ethics must address colonial continuities and complicities and work towards preventing their perpetuation in research. He focusses on the roles of rehumanising and of Whiteness in decolonial praxis, critical research ethics, and the importance of the emotional dimension involved in decolonial debates

What do we mean by decolonizing conservation?:A response to Lanjouw 2021

Decolonization demands a re-framing of conservation and efforts for nature prosperity in non-Western perspectives. It requires an interrogation of the very frame of thought that underpins some aspects of Lanjouw’s (021) article

What do we mean by decolonizing conservation?:A response to Lanjouw 2021

Decolonization demands a re-framing of conservation and efforts for nature prosperity in non-Western perspectives. It requires an interrogation of the very frame of thought that underpins some aspects of Lanjouw’s (021) article

Conservation and the social sciences: Beyond critique and co-optation. A case study from orangutan conservation

Interactions between conservation and the social sciences are frequently characterized by either critique (of conservation by social scientists) or co-optation (of social scientific methods and insights by conservationists). This article seeks to push beyond these two dominant positions by exploring how conservationists and social scientists can engage in mutually transformative dialogue. Jointly authored by conservation scientists and social scientists, it uses the global nexus of orangutan conservation as a lens onto current challenges and possibilities facing the conservation–social science relationship. We begin with a cross-disciplinary overview of recent developments in orangutan conservation—particularly those concerned with its social, political and other human dimensions. The article then undertakes a synthetic analysis of key challenges in orangutan conservation—working across difference, juggling scales and contexts and dealing with politics and political economy—and links them to analogous concerns in the conservation–social science relationship. Finally, we identify some ways by which orangutan conservation specifically, and the conservation–social science relationship more generally, can move forward: through careful use of proxies as bridging devices, through the creation of new, shared spaces, and through a willingness to destabilize and overhaul status quos. This demands an open-ended, unavoidably political commitment to critical reflexivity and self-transformation on the part of both conservationists and social scientists.European Research Council Starting Grant 758494, Brunel University Londo

Listening to place, practising relationality: embodying six emergent protocols for collaborative relational geographies

There is increasing interest within geography around the composition and interdependence of human and environmental dynamics and relational onto-epistemologies. Such interest prompts us to consider questions around respect, power and collaboration, and how we might enact relations across sometimes vast and incommensurable differences as academics and as/with community members. In this paper, we document six protocols which emerged within the Not Lone Wolf network to enable this careful work: Emplacement, Listening, Weaving, Discomfort, Grieving, and Resting. These protocols are material practices that are mindful of the diversity of stakes, opinions and positionalities we hold, and which enable us to navigate through our relations. This paper argues for the importance of attending to such protocols which can shape the doing(s) of relational geographies. It offers possible orientations for geographers and social scientists to experiment with while doing relational geographies

Listening to place, practising relationality: Embodying six emergent protocols for collaborative relational geographies

There is increasing interest within geography around the composition and interdependence of human and environmental dynamics and relational onto-epistemologies. Such interest prompts us to consider questions around respect, power and collaboration, and how we might enact relations across sometimes vast and incommensurable differences as academics and as/with community members. In this paper, we document six protocols which emerged within the Not Lone Wolf network to enable this careful work: Emplacement, Listening, Weaving, Discomfort, Grieving, and Resting. These protocols are material practices that are mindful of the diversity of stakes, opinions and positionalities we hold, and which enable us to navigate through our relations. This paper argues for the importance of attending to such protocols which can shape the doing(s) of relational geographies. It offers possible orientations for geographers and social scientists to experiment with while doing relational geographies.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

COVID-19, Indigenous peoples, local communities and natural resource governance

We report on how the COVID-19 pandemic is affecting Indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs), especially those who govern, manage and conserve their lands and waters. We explore the themes of access and use of natural resources, solidarity, decision-making, the role of governments and IPLCs in managing COVID-19, and the uptake of traditional medicine. These themes are explored through a global online survey in English, Spanish and French. We collected and analysed 133 surveys from 40 countries, using SenseMaker®, a software that enables analysis of micronarratives based on how respondents classify their own stories. We explore the themes further through case studies from Benin, Fiji, France, Gabon, Guyana, Guatemala, India and Madagascar, highlighting challenges and opportunities in how IPLCs responded to COVID-19. Our study underscores the importance of selfempowerment and recognition of IPLC rights, which allows them to use traditional medicines, meet subsistence requirements during lockdowns, help community members and neighbours to sustain livelihoods, and to govern, defend and conserve their territories. We propose key actions to support IPLCs navigate future pandemics while protecting their lands and waters