À partir d’une analyse critique de différentes définitions de l’adaptation, nous avons montré en quoi il est important de tenir compte de la dimension politique de l’adaptation, car celle-ci ne doit pas être analysée uniquement par rapport à des facteurs climatiques. La première partie engage une réflexion sur la conception de l’adaptation au changement climatique au regard de la globalisation institutionnelle de la notion. However, scholars working in other linguistic traditions are increasingly adopting political ecology approaches, including researchers in France, from which we draw further examples of work applying these perspectives to questions of river restoration.Ĭette thèse vise à interroger la manière avec laquelle les politiques de développement, principalement agricoles, impactent l’adaptation au changement climatique des éleveurs dans le delta du fleuve Sénégal. Because political ecology developed and has been practiced mostly by Anglophone researchers, the geographical focus of the chapter is on river restoration in English‐speaking countries, mainly the United States. In this chapter, we examine some of the major themes that have emerged in this scholarship. As a scientific field and a practice of growing importance, river restoration has received growing attention from scholars working in the political ecology tradition. The academic approach that is best suited to this type of critical reflection is known as “political ecology,” an approach that seeks to identify the political dimensions of environmental issues, knowledge, policies, and practices. Even though river restoration would seem to be a departure from the historic practice of modifying rivers, in this chapter we consider it as a further example of how people impact rivers, how this reflects social power, and often gives rise to an uneven distribution of benefits and costs. People have always modified rivers and streams in accordance with what they perceive as their interests, whether it be by diverting, damming, or dredging the stream or streambed, or by altering the banks. This is not so true since the 2000s, as recent works are illustrative of increasing connections, commonalities and possible synergies between french and anglo-american political ecologies. Paralleling the more radical stance of René Dumont – both an agronomist and a pioneering green politician – the heritage of Gourou’s thought is somewhat paradoxical, in that it for long valued the virtues of fieldwork-driven perspectives - and yet downplayed political analysis. ![]() ![]() The founding father of french tropical geography, he had an important and diverse intellectual legacy, ranging from the development-oriented terroir school to more critical tiers-mondistes scholars. ![]() ![]() But geography departments have also harboured important scholarly contributions and debates that can be found for example in the works of Pierre Gourou. In stark contrast with the influential works of anthropologists Meillassoux and Terray, french geographers have indeed progressively lost traction outside of the Francophone world, leading in the late 70s to divergence and ignorance between the anglo-american radical geography and french marxisms. With a specific focus on french geography, it is fair to say that it did not provide a disciplinary anchorage similar to its anglo-american counterparts. Exploring these influences, this chapter challenges the temptation of reducing french political ecology to a mere intellectual script for France’s green movement, unconnected to Francophone academia. With regards to the development of a broadly understood political ecology, francophone and anglo-american intellectual traditions have had uneven, asymmetrical and under-documented influences.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |