CfP: Displacement, Deportation, and (Forced) Migration

This CFP is part of a two-session series focusing on (1) Displacement, Deportation, and (Forced) Migration, and (2) Geographical Perspectives on Social Inequality and Mobility. We plan for each session to have a discussant.

Early career scholars are encouraged to apply.

AAG 2018 CFP: Displacement, Deportation, and (Forced) Migration
Co-organized by: Emily Frazier (The University of Tennessee, Knoxville) & Dylan Connor (The University of Colorado, Boulder)
Sponsored by: Population, Ethnic

Displacement across the globe is now at an all-time high, and the causes, consequences, and sites of dislocation are diverse. Although geography has long been touted as a discipline suited to studying migration, or more recently, mobilities, the phenomenon of displacement has received less attention. Taking Hyndman’s (2000, 2) definition of displacement as “involuntary movement, cultural dislocation, social disruption, material dispossession, and political disenfranchisement”, this session invites papers that critically examine all types, instances and causes of displacement, across scales from the local to the global.

The goal of this session is to unite interest and promote collaboration among scholars of population and displacement. We want to foster conversation and bring together critical conceptualizations of displacement in its various forms. We encourage the submission of papers focused on: empirical examinations of displacement; deportation as a method of curtailing, removing, managing and preventing people from residing in a place; theorizations of “place” and “emplacement”; spatial analyses of displacement; the scalar aspect of displacement; and comparative studies of displacement across a wide range of contexts. Given the persistent vulnerability of displaced populations, we also seek papers with a focus on the experiences of displaced populations.

Other possible topics include, but are not limited to:
– Causes, consequences and repercussions of climate- and disaster-related displacement
– Gentrification, urban development and eviction as drivers of displacement
– Deportation and (forced) migration as displacement
– Resistance(s) to displacement
– Destruction of informal settlements
– Results/Consequences of displacement
– Humanitarian assistance and management of displacement
– Local displacements, for example: New Orleans

Interested participants may send an abstract and PIN to Emily Frazier at eblackar@vols.utk.edu and Dylan Connor at dylan.connor@colorado.edu for consideration by October 23rd.

References:
King, R. 2011. Geography and Migration Studies: Retrospect and Prospect. Population, Space and Place 18(2): 134 – 153.
Hyndman, J. 2000. Managing Displacement: Refugees and the Politics of Humanitarianism. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Second Biennial Conference of the Political Ecology Network (POLLEN)

Second Biennial Conference of the Political Ecology Network (POLLEN)

 POLLEN18: Political Ecology, the Green Economy, and Alternative Sustainabilities

When: 20-22 June 2018
Where: Oslo and Akershus University College, Oslo, Norway
Organised by: The Political Ecology Network (POLLEN) Secretariat; Oslo and Akershus University College; Centre for Environment and Development (SUM), University of Oslo; Noragric, Norwegian University of Life Sciences
Abstract/Panel Submission Deadline: 15 December 2017
Conference Website: https://politicalecologynetwork.com/pollen-biannual-conference/

Contact: politicalecology18@gmail.com

Over the past two decades, political ecologists have provided extensive critiques of the privatization, commodification, and marketization of nature, including of the new forms of accumulation and appropriation that these might facilitate under the more recent guise of the so-called green economy. These critiques have often demonstrated that such approaches can retain deleterious implications for certain vulnerable populations across the developing world and beyond, including in urban centres and within the interstices of the ‘Global North’. With few exceptions, however, political ecologists have paid decidedly less attention to exploring, critically engaging, and ‘planting the seed’ of alternative initiatives for pursuing both sustainability and socio-environmental justice. Surely, many scholars have begun to both support and study movements pursuing alternative socio-ecological relations rooted in critical traditions such as degrowth, postcolonialism, feminism, anarchism, and eco-Marxism. Yet much more could be done to understand and illuminate the prospects for these movements, as well as potential sources of tension and synergy between and amongst them.

Accordingly, this second biennial conference of the Political Ecology Network (POLLEN) aims to engage the emergence of the green economy or green growth in their various iterations explicitly as a terrain of struggle. In doing so, we invite empirical, conceptual, political, and methodological contributions appraising the ways in which there are many potential ‘alternative sustainabilities’ for pursuing human and non-human well-being in the context of global economic and ecological crises. Each of these reflects often quite variable constellations of social, political, and economic relations. However, there are also diverse efforts underway to pre-empt or to foreclose upon these alternatives – as well as tensions, contradictions, and fissions within movements aiming to actualize or enact them – highlighting an implicit politics of precisely whose conception of sustainability is deemed to be possible or desirable in any given time and place.

In pursuit of this objective, proposals for papers and panels are invited that address one or more of the following themes and issues:

  • Concrete forms and effects of green economy practicesincluding the translation of global discourses into place-based projects and programmes for – inter alia – carbon pricing and forestry schemes or other payments for ecosystem services (PES) initiatives; diverse urban socio-ecological metabolisms in the form of ‘green’ gentrification, resilience, or ‘sustainable cities’ planning arrangements; mobilities related to ecotourism, refuge-seeking, and/or environmental displacement; biofuels and renewable energy; ‘climate smart agriculture’ and landscape conservation approaches; ‘neoliberal’ conservation or environmental governance strategies.
  • Drivers and consequences of the emergence of green capitalism,such as effects on socioeconomic inequality; conflict, contestations, and ‘green violence’; environmental securitization or militarization; altered patterns of resource access, including along class and gender lines; shifting relations between capital, civil society, and the state; financial crises under conditions of global environmental change; dynamics of land, ‘green’ and water ‘grabbing’ or acquisition; intersections between past and present varieties of green capitalism and ‘environmental’ colonialism.
  • Challenges for and pathways to alternative sustainabilities,such as those rooted in degrowth, postcolonialism or decolonial thought, eco-Marxism, feminism, anarchism, and environmental justice; synergies and tensions between movements of workers, peasants and indigenous peoples; support and opposition to various alternatives from both ‘above’ and ‘below’; prospects for resistances and contestations operating locally as well as across places, spaces, and scales; emerging or mutating forms of rural and urban populism on the political ‘right’ as well as the left; new racisms and identity-based antagonisms in both the Global North and South.
  • Conceptual, political and methodological reflections about the role of twenty-first century political ecologies vis-à-vis alternative sustainabilities, including those examining promises and complications of ‘engaged’ political ecologies; methodological implications of combined scholarship and activism, as well as other methodological and study design challenges in political ecology; the prefiguration of ‘alternative political ecologies’ and scholarly practices to synergize with ‘alternative sustainabilities’.

We invite paper and full panel proposals for this conference. Abstracts for paper proposals should be approximately 300 words and include author affiliations and contact information. Panel proposals should include a brief description of the session theme, and a maximum of 4 paper abstracts for 1 panel. Please send these to politicalecology18@gmail.com before 15 December 2017.

Keynote speakers:

  1. Paige West (Barnard College and Columbia University, USA)
  2. Tania Murray Li (University of Toronto, Canada)
  3. Ashish Kothari (Kalpavriksh, India)

Organizing committee 

Noragric, Norwegian University of Life Sciences: Tor A. Benjaminsen, Connor Joseph Cavanagh, Mikael Bergius, Jill T. Buseth, Shai Divon

Oslo and Akershus University College: Hanne Svarstad, Roy Krøvel, Thorgeir Kolshus, Andreas Ytterstad, Berit Aasen

Centre for Environment and Development (SUM), University of Oslo: Mariel Aguilar Støen, Susanne Normann, Jostein Jakobsen

 Advisory board

Bram Büscher (Wageningen University, the Netherlands)
Christine Noe (University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania)
Denis Gautier (CIRAD, Montpellier, France)
Sian Sullivan (Bath Spa University, UK)
Nitin Rai (ATREE, India)

Kathleen McAfee (San Francisco State University, USA)
Simon Batterbury (Lancaster University, UK)
Tracey Osborne (University of Arizona, USA)
Wendy Harcourt (ISS, Erasmus University, the Netherlands)
Adrian Nel (University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa)
Andrea Nightingale (University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden)
Wolfram Dressler (University of Melbourne, Australia)
Rosaleen Duffy (University of Sheffield, UK)
Ashish Kothari (Kalpavriksh, India)
Susan Paulson (University of Florida, USA)
Robert Fletcher (Wageningen University, the Netherlands)
Amber Huff (IDS, University of Sussex, UK)
Amita Baviskar (Institute for Economic Growth, India)
Paul Robbins (University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA)
Frances Cleaver (University of Sheffield, UK)
Maano Ramutsindela (University of Cape Town, South Africa)
Peter Wilshusen (Bucknell University, USA)
Noella Gray (University of Guelph, Canada)
Marta Irving (Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil)
Dan Brockington (University of Sheffield, UK)
Kristen Lyons (University of Queensland, Australia)
Esteve Corbera (ICTA, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Spain)
Elizabeth Shapiro-Garza (Duke University, USA)
Scott Prudham (University of Toronto, Canada)
Lyla Mehta (IDS, University of Sussex, UK)
Jim Igoe (University of Virginia, USA)
Catherine Corson (Mount Holyoke College, USA)
Elizabeth Lunstrum (York University, Canada)
Jun Borras (ISS, Erasmus University, the Netherlands)
Leah Horowitz (University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA)
David Tumusiime (Makerere University, Uganda)
Ken MacDonald (University of Toronto, Canada)
Marja Spierenburg (Radboud University, the Netherlands)
Ben Neimark (Lancaster University, UK)
Isabelle Anguelovski (Autonomous University of Barcelona, Spain)
Robin Roth (University of Guelph, Canada)
Christos Zografos (Johns Hopkins University – Pompeu Fabra University, Spain)
Jessica Dempsey (University of British Columbia, Canada)

Bill Adams (University of Cambridge, UK)

Place and venue: The Norwegian capital of Oslo is beautifully situated on the coastal Oslofjord, straddling the scenic Akerselva river and surrounded by forests and cultural landscapes. The Oslo and Akershus University College is exceptionally well-situated in the centre of the city, within walking distance of major landmarks and attractions.

About POLLEN: The Political Ecology Network (POLLEN) is an umbrella organisation of political ecology researchers, groups, projects, networks and ‘nodes’ across the globe. As the name suggests, POLLEN seeks to provide a platform for the ‘cross fertilization’ of ideas where the world’s many rich and diverse intellectual traditions of environmental thought can come together, discuss, and debate the latest developments in the field. For more information or to sign up for (free!) membership in the network, please visit https://politicalecologynetwork.com/

CfP: Contesting Border Formation(s): Territory, Crises, and Resistance

Final CFP: AAG 2018
Contesting Border Formation(s): Territory, Crises, and Resistance

Co-organizers:
Vera Smirnova, Urban Affairs and Planning, Virginia Tech
Jared Keyel, Government and International Affairs, Virginia Tech

Sponsored by the Political Geography Specialty Group

Borders are politically and socially produced phenomena, they appear as fixed, yet are always in flux. Borders are not merely edges but contested and strategic frontiers, crucial for (re)production of prevalent power relations. Border formation can be exploited to legitimize dispossession, land theft, or the displacement of marginalized communities and, as Agamben (2005) has argued, create states and zones of exception. Border (re)formation in response to the current economic crises and political instabilities has proven to be a disputed process whereby varied constellations of overlapping actors and interests seek to exploit moments of instability to consolidate and exercise power in novel ways. ‘Border’ as a concept has generated much research in the fields of political geography, political theory, and international relations, yet, it has received comparatively less attention than other scales of analysis such as ‘territory’ or ‘space’. Moreover, Anglophone scholarship on border formation, in many cases, is state-centric, primarily seeing borders as a state territorial container or coercive state power strategy (Soja, 1971; Gottmann, 1973; Sack, 1986; Taylor, 1994; Elden, 2009).

This session seeks contributions that contest border formation in the present moment and/or through their historical manifestations, advance understanding of borders that serve at once as a means of coercion and resistance, or perceive borders as lived spaces where both top-down and bottom-up practices overlap and often clash. We invite theoretically rich and/or empirically grounded papers that directly engage in problematizing border formation and together can unite, contribute, or advance the on-going debate.

Topics might include but are not limited to:
– Urbanization, dispossession, and displacement;
– Land appropriation, enclosure, and agrarian crisis;
– Migration and refugee crisis;
– Decolonization or new imperialism;
– Sovereignty and territoriality;
– Violence and territoriality;
– Borders in racialized or gendered marginalization;

If you are interested in joining the session, please send abstracts of up to 250 words to Vera Smirnova (veras@vt.edu) and Jared Keyel (jaredk1@vt.edu) by October 24, we will respond right away so that you have time to register on October 25th.

References:
Agamben G (2005) State of exception. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Elden S (2009) Terror and Territory: The Spatial Extent of Sovereignty. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Gottmann J (1973) Significance of Territory. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.
Sack RD (1986) Human Territoriality: Its Theory and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Soja E (1971) The Political Organization of Space. Washington, DC: Commission on College Geography, Association of American Geographers.

CfP: Engaging your audience: Finding meaning in the Geographical film

Engaging your audience: Finding meaning in the Geographical film

American Association of Geographers Annual Meeting

New Orleans 2018

Digital video is expected to account for nearly 80 percent of global internet traffic by 2020 (Cisco 2017), and its use is rapidly transforming the way geographers carry out research and present it to a wider audience. These changes have permeated all levels of teaching and research practice leading to urgent calls within the discipline to pay more attention to our media literacy (Lukinbeal 2014) as well as contributing to a renewed scrutiny of the categorisation of video and moving-mage research as a visual method (Jacobs 2015). While this has led to a growing interest in the way that filmmaking itself is changing the relationship between researcher and participant, it also raises new challenges in terms of measuring how audiences engage with geographical films. When geographers use or produce video for teaching or presenting their research, how can we measure and assess its impact – what kind of engagement is taking place with the audience and what tools are available to help us find out.

This session aims to explore the connections between the process of making a film but also seeks to find out answers to how we can speak about audience engagement. This call therefore is for papers (but also other formats such as interactive documentaries, short films, videoclips, performances, maps or apps) that explore the interconnections between the production of digital film and video and its reception as a form of geographical teaching tool.

Please send a 300-word abstract as soon as possible following AAG guidelines Jessica Jacobs j.jacobs@qmul.ac.uk and Joseph Palis jepalis@up.edu.ph

General Registration details below:

  1. Register online with the AAG to obtain a PIN.
  2. Email Presenter Identification Number (PIN) and abstract to Joseph Palis jepalis@up.edu.ph and Jessica Jacobs j.jacobs@qmul.ac.uk

2nd CfP: The Region as Method

We still have space for two papers:

Cold War era area studies and traditional regional geography were presented by their proponents as integrative fields – approaches to coalesce macro and micro level analyses of geo-strategic motives, social processes, and political and economic dynamics. In the 1990s, a reiteration of regional geography under the label of New Regionalism (Storper 1997) explored economic processes at the local level, yet maintaining a keen attention to multilevel and comparative sociopolitical dimensions. Since then, the predominance of thematic foci in the discipline – such as political geography writ large, and strands of economic geography such as global value chains and production networks created topical, theoretical, and in some cases methodological division between state-centered analyses in political geography and firms-centered analyses in economic geography. Notwithstanding the claims of geoeconomics to account for the role of the market in larger political decisions, and GVC and GPN roles of the state in governance, it is difficult to account for the liminal spaces in which firms and states actually interact, and, consequently, for the ways in which the increasingly transnational life of firms influences changes in the structure of states.

This session invites reflections on how regional analyses may be able to carry forward more nuanced analyses of the processes tying together firms and states. These include, but are not limited to, new forms of sovereignty and territoriality aimed at regulating but also supporting firms within as well as without borders.

  • We welcome regionally focused contributions from economic, political, and cultural geographers that include, but are not limited to:
  • Theoretical reflections on the notion of region within geo-economic imaginaries that privilege metaphors of flows over viewing states as static frames;
  • The interactions between states sponsored investment promotion practices and firms’ locational choices;
  • Commercial and business diplomacy;
  • Questioning of the organizational boundaries between states and firms through public-private partnerships and other means;
  • Theoretical discussions of the role of states in value chains and production networks, as well as the role of firms in geo-economics;
  • Empirical studies of how transnational firms (both large multinationals and small transnational or diaspora businesses), governments, and civil societies communicate their reciprocal interests and mediate conflicts;

Depending on the quality of the papers and inclinations of the participants we will submit a special journal issue proposal. Accordingly, please plan to submit a paper at an advanced draft level.

Please send your abstracts to Christian Sellar csellar@olemiss.edu or Jeremy Tasch jtasch@towson.edu

CfP: Moving Beyond the War on Drugs: Race, Space, and Power

CFP AAG 2018

Moving Beyond the War on Drugs: Race, Space, and Power

AAG Annual Meeting, New Orleans, April 10-14 2017

Session Organizer:   Jurgen von Mahs, The New School

It is estimated that over half of all Americans 12 years and older have consumed illicit drugs at some point in their lives, that some 24 million suffer from active addiction, and that nearly 100.000 people die each year as a direct result of alcohol or drug abuse. We know that the (ab)use of such mind altering substances does not discriminate by race, gender, or age. Yet the public response – through the war on drugs – has largely targeted ethnic minorities living in urban areas and disproportionate numbers of African American and Hispanic males end up in the criminal justice and prison system.

The proposed paper session examines the causes and consequences of current approaches by looking at the social, economic, and political dimensions of urban drug use and public policy responses alongside solutions to overcome the institutional racism that undergirds current policy.

Potential topics and case studies may include but are not limited to:

  • Nature, extent, and history of the War on Drugs
  • Impacts of the War on Drugs on cities and their residents
  • Interconnections between space and race in the War on Drugs
  • Racialized public discourses around drug use and drug policy
  • Carceral geographies and prison systems
  • Economic dimensions of the War on Drugs
  •  Policy reforms beyond punishment and racism

If you are interested in participating in this session please send a 250-word abstract to Jurgen von Mahs (freiherr@newschool.edu) no later than Saturday, Oct. 21. Please make sure to also include (1) paper title; (2) author(s); (3) institutional affiliation(s); (4) email address; and (5) five key words with your abstract.  Decisions will be made by Monday, 10/23. The abstract due date is 10/25 and we will request PIN numbers upon registration to affiliate papers with this session.

Organizer: Jurgen von Mahs, Associate Professor in Urban Studies, The New School, New York

CfP: Migrants’ struggles beyond activism, repression and solidarity

Session: Migrants’ struggles beyond activism, repression and solidarity.

Organizers: Pierpaolo Mudu (University of Washington-Tacoma), , Sutapa Chattopadhyay (University of Regina), Harald Bauder (Ryerson University)

Abstract: The political role of migrants in Europe and North America is a new factor compared to the postwar situation when migrants from southern Europe were settling in central European countries such as France, Belgium, Switzerland and Germany and in north America. In Europe, the working class organizations associated to communists, socialists and social democrats parties and later to the so-called extra-parliamentary movements ensured the representation of migrants’ claims within wider social struggles. In northern America, different patterns of ethnic assimilation and segregation policies defined the fate of the newcomers. The expansion and consolidation of the European Union (EU), the transformation of migration flows and the affirmation of global neo-liberalism, that took place at the end of the last century, have made the political activism of migrants something completely new. Since the 1990s, in parallel new xenophobic discourses have started to define the political agenda both in North America and in the EU. In 1993, Clinton authorized the construction of fencing along the Mexican border and in 1995 the EU defined its “Schengen area” to regulate internal and external borders. A new era of migrants’ struggles followed the illegalization process of refugees and migrants and their representation as invaders, victims to be assisted, and subjects to be integrated. The multiplication of borders and camps have been associated to the multiplication of spaces of contestation of migrants’ confinement and segregation policies.

This session is interested in exploring which set of struggles present the most disruptive and innovative characters. We welcome papers from radical scholars, independent researchers, students and activists. Papers may focus on any aspect of the struggles that see migrants as active subjects, including but not limited to addressing a set of questions that deserve thorough analysis and probably represent only research/action directions. For example, which repertoire of contention migrants and activists use? What examples can be cited as emblematic to evaluate the effectiveness of these movements and their impact on parties and policies? Which critical and analytical possibilities have emerged from studies on migration and citizenship according to the most radical mobilizations against detention centers, segregation and criminalization of freedom of movement? How important are struggles around no-borders, free borders and open borders discourses? Which degree of autonomy can be guaranteed in radical struggles that see migrants coalesced with various heterogeneous political subjects?

 

Please send your proposals a.s.a.p. to:

pmudu@uw.edus.chattopadhyay@maastrichtuniversity.nl or hbauder@geography.ryerson.ca

CfP: Energy

Socio-Economic Parameters in the Public Acceptance of

Renewable Energy Landscapes

 

Dr. Bohumil Frantal, Palacky University, Olomouc, Czech Republic

Prof. Martin J. Pasqualetti, Arizona State University, Tempe, USA

 

One of the first articles dealing with public perceptions of emerging renewable energy landscapes was by a geographer (Pasqualetti & Butler 1987). Although subsequent research has suggested that aesthetic preferences concerning landscape impacts best predict the local acceptance of renewables (e.g., Pasqualetti 2012; Wolsink 2007), recent studies proved that the impact of visibility on acceptance is not linked just to the physical landscape context but also to socio-economic parameters of projects. Others even emphasized that not a visual impact, but perception of health risks, appraisal of community benefits, general community enhancement, and preferences for renewable-generated electricity are the key predictors of local support for renewables (Baxter et al. 2013). While an adaptation to changed landscape character turned out to be a common phenomenon, the negative perceptions concerning increasing electricity prices due to the feed-in tariffs and other subsidies, the noise annoyance from wind turbines or a smell from biogas stations, and uncertainties surrounding the long term effects and health risks of these facilities seem to persist years after construction was completed (Groth & Vogt 2014, Martinat et al. 2017). After three decades of our co-existence with renewable energy landscapes, there are still many unanswered questions regarding public perceptions and a wider diffusion and adoption of renewables, and there are other concepts besides the invalid NIMBY theory that need to be revised and/or adapted in the light of the latest developments, such as the U-curve theory, the proximity hypothesis, the spatial and distributional justice, the resource curse, et cetera. These and other issues will be discussed in this paper session.

Interested participants should send abstracts to  frantal@geonika.cz  by October 30. Participants will be notified of acceptance and inclusion into the session by turn.

 

 

Recycling Energy Landscapes in a Crowded World

Organizers:

Dr. Stanislav Martinat, Institute of Geonics, The Czech Academy of Sciences

Prof. Martin J. Pasqualetti, Arizona State University, Tempe

 

Over the centuries, energy development has largely been a linear enterprise, ending in landscapes disrupted, abandoned, poisoned, and forgotten. This approach is no longer viable. The ongoing “third energy transition” (Whipple, 2011) – a transition from fossil fuels that underpinned the industrial age – to a post-industrial era characterized by increasing competition between the land used for energy development and the land needed for cities, farms, recreation, and contemplation.  In many countries, there is increasing pressure to regenerate, reclaim, and redevelop the abandoned, derelict and contaminated areas left behind. These include abandoned mines, processing equipment, waste heaps, disused oil and gas wells, and other traditional energy landscapes. The repurposing of these landscapes – and often disused buildings that rest on them – has become increasingly imperative and economically sensible in the last two decades as competition for land has increased and as emerging policies and economic instruments have grown to support the regeneration processes (e.g., the Re-powering America´s land Initiative, EPA, 2013).  We have now reached a period when “recycling“ energy landscapes is occurring with increasing frequency. Examples of this new stage in land use include converting opencast mines to recreational lakes, power plant buildings into museums, sites of mountain-top removal into golf courses, ash disposal piles into the solar farms, canals paths into bike paths, and a wide assortment of energy infrastructure into destinations for „energy tourism“ (Frantál & Urbánková, 2017).  This session is intended to identify the need, forms, incentives, and barriers to recycling energy landscapes.

Interested participants should send abstracts to  martinat@geonika.cz by  October 30. Participants will be notified of acceptance and inclusion into the session by turn.

CfP: Producing Illicit Agricultures & Natures

Apologies for the cross posting.

American Association of Geographers 2018 Annual Conference, New Orleans

Producing Illicit Agricultures & Natures

Plants and humans have developed intimate relationships throughout human history, and the nature of those relationships has frequently been fraught with conflicting values and meanings. As such, we seek to examine a wide breadth of topics in this session that explore (il)licit natures and agricultures, from sacred plants – like Mama Coca and peyote – to the global War on Drugs, from re-legalized hemp and taboo tobacco to agricultural trade embargoes and blockades–and all the political ecologies therein. We recognize that illicit plants maintain long histories as foodstuffs, medicines, cultural signifiers and commodities, and we ground our session in the lived realities of planting and harvesting crops deemed illicit. We are primarily interested in the experiences of growers themselves, though we welcome research on the broader dynamics entangling law officials, police, processors, distributers, consumers, public health, alternative medicine, and the military and prison industrial complexes and their roles in (re)producing illicit agricultures and natures. We welcome analyses that emphasize illicit crops (or the illegality of crops as such) analyzed from the perspective of agrarian viability, agrarian heritage, agrarian crisis, or agrarian change. We also welcome analyses of how the law itself is constructed, enforced, and manifested in farmer decisions and in agricultural fields themselves-and how this plays out via racialization and racism. Finally, we invite reflections on the methodological challenges of working at the fringes of licitness and how important potential research is foreclosed by the subject matter’s very illegality.

We are interested in illicit agricultures and natures in their varied manifestations across time and space, and, as such, we welcome paper ideas that address:

The production of agrarian (il)licitness
The varied trajectories of illegality and legalization in agriculture
Illicit crops as a livelihood strategy
Illicit market formation and less-than-legal markets
Criminalization of agrarian movements
Redefining and challenging ‘illicit’
Racialization, racism, and the production of illicit crops
Gender and illicit agricultures
Impact of trade embargos & blockades on agri-food production and distribution
Coloniality of Drug Wars
Policing agriculture
Agriculture and the law
Indigeneity and the cosmological significance of plants deemed illicit
Decolonizing nature(s)
Alternative ecological ontologies that destabilize (il)licitness

If you wish to present a paper in the scholarly session, please submit your 250-word abstract to Nicholas Padilla (Western Michigan University) (nicholas.padilla@wmich.edu), Garrett Graddy-Lovelace (American University School of International Service) (graddy@american.edu), or Gabriel Tamariz (Penn State University) (gabrieltamariz@psu.edu) by October 25th 2017.

Tenure Track Position-Univ of South Carolina

SOUTH CAROLINA, COLUMBIA
The Department of Geography (artsandsciences.sc.edu/geog) at the University of South Carolina (USC) invites applications for a full-time tenure track position at the rank of Assistant Professor in the area of Geography and Human Rights starting August 16, 2018.

The successful candidate, who will have a Ph.D. in geography or a closely related field at the time of appointment, should have a research program that provides insights into international human rights issues. Possible interests include humanitarian aid and development; refugee policy; health, education, and housing disparities; gender/sexual oppression; minority rights; and/or food/water security. The successful candidate’s research program will actively engage with current theoretical discussions and debates within geography and across disciplines.  We seek a scholar who is attuned to the particular problems faced by migrants, internally-displaced populations, non-citizens, racialized minorities, sexual minorities, women, and/or children. The hire should have in-depth expertise and fieldwork experience outside the United States context.

The successful candidate will participate actively in study abroad and service-learning programs and will contribute to globalizing initiatives at USC such as the Maxcy Global Scholars program and the Global Studies major. The candidate will be able to pursue cross-campus and interdisciplinary connections with the Rule of Law Collaborative, the Walker Institute of International and Area Studies, and the Colleges of Education and Social Work.

The successful candidate will join an active, top ranked geography program while also having opportunities to work within a dedicated, campus-wide community of scholars.  We encourage candidates who can contribute to University initiatives that foster diversity and inclusion.  Preference will be given to candidates who possess a strong record of publication and extramural funding, research and teaching interests that complement and expand existing departmental strengths, and a demonstrated ability to work with interdisciplinary groups.

Columbia is a vibrant community with approximately 800,000 people across the greater metropolitan area. It is the home of state government, major corporate headquarters, diverse entertainment venues, a lively arts scene, and affordable neighborhoods.  Located in the middle of the state, Columbia provides easy access to South Carolina’s beautiful beaches and mountains.

Candidates should provide a letter of application describing current and future research activities and teaching interests/experience, a curriculum vitae, and the names and contact information (including e-mail addresses) of at least three referees.  Applicants should submit these materials through USC Jobs: https://uscjobs.sc.edu/  by Monday, November 20, 2017 for full consideration. The search will continue until the position is filled.  Please contact the Search Committee Chair, Professor Kirstin Dow (kdow@sc.edu), for further information.

The University of South Carolina is an affirmative action, equal opportunity employer. Women and minorities are encouraged to apply. The University of South Carolina does not discriminate in educational or employment opportunities on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender, age, disability, veteran status or genetics.

The University of South Carolina is responsive to the needs of dual-career couples.