title: Risky spaces: Creating, contesting and communicating lines on environmental hazard maps

authors: Haughton, Graham

subjects: Social Sciences

abstract: This paper examines the tensions involved in the production, presentation and revision of hazard maps, focusing on the controversies that have become increasingly common when they are used to change government policy. Our scope includes all the major environmental hazards currently being mapped in New Zealand, one of the world's most exposed and hazard‐aware countries. Selecting one country also allowed a multi‐hazard approach to be taken that helps provide messages for other countries. Drawing on interviews with 24 key informants, the paper identifies a range of reasons for explaining the recent growth in hazard mapping and why hazard maps sometimes resulted in high‐profile controversies. Two themes emerged out of this analysis: an inconsistency in modelling and mapping hazards that created opportunity for challenge and the selective mobilisation of scientific uncertainty to dispute the legitimacy of official maps, particularly on developed land. The findings highlight the multiple roles of mapping, positioning maps as potentially instruments of both depoliticisation and repoliticisation. We emphasise how conflicts are most likely when maps are used as technocratic instruments of depoliticisation, and that creating maps in a more open way can generate valuable opportunities to engage with communities in more creative policy‐making regarding the threats they face and how they can respond. Mapping processes that open up the space for critical debate can act as important debate‐support tools as well as decision‐support tools, particularly when used to give voice to those not normally heard or treated as equal.

text: Risky spaces: Creating, contesting and communicating lines on environmental hazard maps This paper examines the tensions involved in the production, presentation and revision of hazard maps, focusing on the controversies that have become increasingly common when they are used to change government policy. Our scope includes all the major environmental hazards currently being mapped in New Zealand, one of the world's most exposed and hazard‐aware countries. Selecting one country also allowed a multi‐hazard approach to be taken that helps provide messages for other countries. Drawing on interviews with 24 key informants, the paper identifies a range of reasons for explaining the recent growth in hazard mapping and why hazard maps sometimes resulted in high‐profile controversies. Two themes emerged out of this analysis: an inconsistency in modelling and mapping hazards that created opportunity for challenge and the selective mobilisation of scientific uncertainty to dispute the legitimacy of official maps, particularly on developed land. The findings highlight the multiple roles of mapping, positioning maps as potentially instruments of both depoliticisation and repoliticisation. We emphasise how conflicts are most likely when maps are used as technocratic instruments of depoliticisation, and that creating maps in a more open way can generate valuable opportunities to engage with communities in more creative policy‐making regarding the threats they face and how they can respond. Mapping processes that open up the space for critical debate can act as important debate‐support tools as well as decision‐support tools, particularly when used to give voice to those not normally heard or treated as equal.

year: 2018

title: [Review of New Scores From Promethean Editions]

authors: Lodge, Martin

abstract: Review of New Scores From Promethean Editions

text: [Review of New Scores From Promethean Editions] Review of New Scores From Promethean Editions

year: 1997

title: The Indigenous Exchange Forum: transitions in mine closure

authors: Holcombe, Sarah

abstract: “The Indigenous Exchange Forum: transitions in mine closure” was held on 2–3 November 2021 over Zoom, hosted by the Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining (CSRM) in the Sustainable Minerals Institute (SMI), at The University of Queensland.
The Forum aimed to affirm, connect, and elevate the voices of First Nations leaders and interested community members impacted by mining and mine closure. In doing so, we hoped to begin to build an international network across these Indigenous communities, to enable the sharing of experiences, struggles, and sentiments in relation to mine site transition and mine-related impacts on their lands.
The intent was to recognise each other’s unique cultural position and the impact of mining and mine closure through lessons learned: first with each other and then with industry.
The Forum had a strong foundation of reciprocity. The objective was:
•To provide an independent and culturally safe space to facilitate the connectionbetween First Nations peoples, whose customary lands have been impacted bymining.
•To position First Nations voices individually and collectively in a shared learningjourney full of experiences and lessons learned through online network exchange.
•To facilitate knowledge exchange and elevate the connectivity between Canadian,Australian, and Aotearoa (New Zealand) First Nations regarding impacts, issues, andinnovative ideas and practices in response to mine site transitions and mine closure.

text: The Indigenous Exchange Forum: transitions in mine closure “The Indigenous Exchange Forum: transitions in mine closure” was held on 2–3 November 2021 over Zoom, hosted by the Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining (CSRM) in the Sustainable Minerals Institute (SMI), at The University of Queensland.
The Forum aimed to affirm, connect, and elevate the voices of First Nations leaders and interested community members impacted by mining and mine closure. In doing so, we hoped to begin to build an international network across these Indigenous communities, to enable the sharing of experiences, struggles, and sentiments in relation to mine site transition and mine-related impacts on their lands.
The intent was to recognise each other’s unique cultural position and the impact of mining and mine closure through lessons learned: first with each other and then with industry.
The Forum had a strong foundation of reciprocity. The objective was:
•To provide an independent and culturally safe space to facilitate the connectionbetween First Nations peoples, whose customary lands have been impacted bymining.
•To position First Nations voices individually and collectively in a shared learningjourney full of experiences and lessons learned through online network exchange.
•To facilitate knowledge exchange and elevate the connectivity between Canadian,Australian, and Aotearoa (New Zealand) First Nations regarding impacts, issues, andinnovative ideas and practices in response to mine site transitions and mine closure.

year: 2022