[Iag-list] CFP IAG Hobart 2019 Legal Geography Study Group sessions
josephine.gillespie at sydney.edu.au
Thu Jan 31 13:06:40 AEDT 2019
Hello IAG List members,
We are pleased to announce that the Legal Geography Study Group is sponsoring three sessions in Hobart 2019. We look forward to receiving your abstracts before 28 February via the conference website https://cdesign.eventsair.com/2019-iag/abstracts<https://protect-au.mimecast.com/s/Uyu6Cq7BKYtYg2DAhZLM9o?domain=cdesign.eventsair.com> and please email a copy to us Tayanah O'Donnell (tayanah.odonnell at anu.edu.au<mailto:tayanah.odonnell at anu.edu.au>) and Jo Gillespie (Josephine.gillespie at sydney.edu.au<mailto:Josephine.gillespie at sydney.edu.au>).
Tayanah and Jo
IAG Legal Geography Study Group Convenors
1. Environmental Regulation and the More-than-human
Convenors: Jo Gillespie (USyd), Nicola Perry (USyd) and Tayanah O'Donnell (ANU/RMIT)
More-than-human scholarship is a well-established and rapidly growing focus of inter-disciplinary research. In line with broader aims to re-situate animate, inanimate and complex sets of interactions between non-human and human entities (for example, ecosystems, public spaces etcetera), recent legal geographic scholarship points to increasing recognition of the agency of these 'more-than-human' entities (including place) in co-producing situated legal regimes (O'Gorman, 2016, Bartel, 2017). Accounting for these situated legal regimes can shed additional light and space on the more-than-human. This session seeks to stimulate further discussion around the ways in which legal geographic scholarship may contribute to enacting non-universalist environmental regulation that better accounts for and recognises the agencies (and rights) of non-human entities from conception to realisation. We seek to draw out the tension between the goals of environmental law as controlling human behaviour to achieve specific outcomes on the one-hand, as contrasted with the unruliness, alternative agency and 'wildness' of the more-than-human world. For example, what happens when species move outside of protected area boundaries in response to changing climatic conditions? How might the way in which biodiversity law frequently seeks to protect lists of individual species conflict with theorising around multispecies justice? How does recognising non-human agency impact questions around what environmental law 'should' seek to preserve/restore? Braverman's 'Lively Legalities' work additionally provides a useful springboard for extended consideration of the ethical dimensions of 'regulating life', in which she explores "...what, in legal terms, it means to be human and nonhuman, what it means to govern and to be governed, and what are the ethical and political concerns that emerge from the project of governing human as well as more-than-human life." (Braverman, 2016, p.3).
This session will invite contributions which address the theme of the interplay between environmental regulation and the more-than-human.
Refs: Bartel, R. (2017). Place-speaking: Attending to the relational, material and governance messages of Silent Spring. Geographical Journal, 184(1), 64-74; Braverman, I, (2016), Animals, Biopolitics, Law: Lively Legalities, Routledge, Abingdon and New York; O'Gorman, E. (2016). The pelican slaughter of 1911: a history of competing values, killing and private property from the Coorong, South Australia. Geographical Research, 54(3), 285-300.
2. Geographies of Conflict: Law, Legalism and (Il)Legality
Convenor: Brad Jessup (UMelb)
This session emanates from and builds upon the Legal Geography Study group symposium held in February 2019 on the theme 'Sites of Justice and Injustice'. The papers in this session will address a conflict over time(s), place(s) or scale(s), drawing in matters, intersections or absences of law and geography.
3. Material laws, material worlds: converging potential as between political ecology and legal geography
Convenors: Tayanah O'Donnell (ANU/RMIT) and Jo Gillespie (USyd)
This session springs from an emergent literature which explicitly engages with the linkages or otherwise between political ecology and legal geography (e.g. Andrews and McCarthy 2014 and Salgo and Gillespie 2018). Political ecologists have long been engaged in exposing different forms of power dynamics in environmental settings to aid decision-making in environmental policy. Legal geographers are interested in exposing these power dynamics (Blomley 1994; O'Donnell 2016) in their quest to better explore and understand the relationships between space, place, and law. Linking these distinctive fields opens a deep crevasse through which scholars can centre materiality. There are important reasons to do so, beyond the theoretical. Policy and practice are demanding better understanding of the role of law in responding to environmental change. Equally, a rapidly changing material world gives to law new and ever-changing challenges. Our provocations for this session are: can disciplinary convergence dilute the potential of interdisciplinary endeavours? How does law interact with the political-social in shaping place, and in what ways is environmental and climatic change influencing this dynamic?
Andrews, E. and McCarthy, J., (2014) Scale, Shale, and the State: Political Ecologies and Legal Geographies of Shale gas Development in Pennsylvania, Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 4:1, pp. 7-16; Blomley, N., (1994) Law, Space, and the Geographies of Power (The Guilford Press, London); O'Donnell, T., (2016) Legal geography and coastal climate change adaptation: the Vaughan litigation, Geographical Research 54:3, pp. 301-312; Salgo, M. and Gillespie, J., (2018) Cracking the Code: a legal geography and political ecological perspective on vegetation clearing regulations, Australian Geographer, 49:4, pp. 483 - 496.
Dr Josephine Gillespie
School of Geosciences
The University of Sydney
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Iag-list