CfP: The dynamics of anti-tourism

In 2017 activists in several venues (Barcelona, Venice, Palma de Mallorca, Amsterdam, Bhutan, Dubrovnik, to name a few) launched local campaigns against tourists and tourism. In August, UNWTO Secretary General Taleb Rifai called the rise in anti-tourist sentiment is “a very serious situation that needs to be addressed in a serious way.”

What is behind these actions and how do we best understand them? Are they simply a reaction to perceived ‘overtourism’ (a term widely adopted in the media this year)? Do they imply a disillusionment with, or critique of, mass tourism’s cultural influence? Are they best understood as criticism of certain types of tourism – cruise tourists, casinos, mega-events? Do the very diverse forms of anti-tourism contain a common thread? Are they motivated by a desire for resources, recognition, growth or de-growth?

While some attention has been given to opposition to specific forms of tourism(Boykoff, 2011; Briassoulis, 2011; Cox, 1993) we need a deeper understanding of the various forms and manifestations of anti-tourism as well as the impact such movements have. This session seeks papers that address opposition to tourism of all kinds, which might include:

-​Reactions to perceived ‘overtourism’

– Anti-tourism and cultural identity

-Controversies over resource use: tourism and recreation versus other uses
-Disputes among tourists over access and predominant forms of tourism within a given site (e.g. backpacker tourists vs. coach tourists)
-Opposition to specific types of tourism development: casinos, cruise tourism, the Olympic games, sex tourism
-Anti-tourism as a new social movement
-Historical evolution of anti-tourism

-The impact of anti-tourism movements on tourism destinations

-Tourism and the ‘right to the city’
Please send an abstract of no more than 250 words and your personal identification number (received from the AAG after applying online at www.aag.org) to one of the organizers by

​ ​

October 20, 2017:

Michael Clancy                                              Jim Butcher
University of Hartford (USA)                       Canterbury Christ Church University
clancy@hartford.edu                                    jim.butcher@canterbury.ac.uk

CfP: ​​Geographies of Migrant Return and Removal

2nd CFP: AAG Annual Meeting
New Orleans
, LA​

April 10-14 2018

​​Geographies of Migrant Return and Removal


Organizers: Malene Jacobsen (University of Kentucky) and Austin Crane (University of Washington)

Discussant: Nancy Hiemstra (Stony Brook University)
Sponsored by the Political Geography Specialty Group

Recent scholarship has called attention to how processes of bordering are becoming disconnected from state territorial borders, aiming to “manage” migrants internally (Coleman and Kocher 2011), externally (Bialasiewicz 2012; Casas-Cortes, et al. 2013), and transnationally (Collyer and King 2015; Mountz and Loyd 2014). Scholars have addressed a variety of geopolitical and biopolitical practices of migration management, such as the growth of detention and deportation (Collyer 2012; Mountz, et al. 2013), the economics of detention (Conlon and Hiemstra 2016), frequent transfers of detainees (Gill 2009), family detention (Martin 2011), protracted waiting and legal ambiguity (Conlon 2011; Hyndman and Giles 2011), and the role of international humanitarian organizations (Andrijasevic and Walters 2010; Ashutosh and Mountz 2011). This growing field of literature calls attention to the discursive, spatial, and (geo)political dimensions of how migration management is worked out within and between various sites.

In conversation with this body of work, this session examines the geographies of migrant return and removal. Migrant returns programs are an integral component of migration and border management around the world today, and are part of a long history of expulsion (Ngai 2004; Walters 2010). Western countries are employing various migrant removal policies – from forcible deportation to Assisted Voluntary Return and Readmission Agreements – to return non-citizens to their countries of origin or transit. These programs are variously framed by institutions and politicians as managing migration, as humanitarian, and as justified to maintain security alongside the integrity of larger asylum systems. The return and deportation of migrants have and continue to play an integral role in the geopolitical landscape and biopolitical governance of migration management.

We welcome submissions that address the politics, processes, and mechanics of migrant removal, as well as the decisions and lived realities involved with returning – of migrants and government/humanitarian practitioners. We seek submissions that bring together various disciplinary perspectives, research locations, and theoretical lenses (feminist geopolitics, postcolonial studies, critical race studies, legal geography, critical border studies, relational poverty, political economy, and related fields) to better understand the geographies of return and removal in migration management.

Possible themes and questions include:

  • The political discourses and rationalities of return: what are the logics and decisions involved in migrants returning or not (both from governance and migrant perspectives)?
  • The material processes and spaces of return: How does (voluntarily or forced) return take place? What are the spaces that make return possible (airports, detention centers, aircrafts, transit countries, offices, homes, etc.)? Which actors, techniques, places, and programs are involved in implementing or resisting returns?
  • The geopolitics and biopolitics of return: how is political power exercised and negotiated in relation to migrant returns (policies, laws, technologies, institutional networks, geopolitical relations between countries, and sovereignty over territory)?
  • The historical geographies of return: What are the historical geographies of migrant return and how might these spaces be linked to present return programs?
Please submit titles and abstracts (250 words) by 

​​

October 18th to Austin Crane (acrane@uw.edu) and Malene Jacobsen (malene.jacobsen@uky.edu). We hope that participants will prepare to share paper drafts ahead of time in order to enhance our discussion.



References
Andrijasevic, Rutvica, and William Walters. 2010. “The International Organization for Migration and the international government of borders.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 28(3): 977-999.

Ashutosh, Ishan, and Alison Mountz. 2011. “Migration management for the benefit of whom? Interrogating the work of the International Organization for Migration.” Citizenship Studies 15(1): 21-38.

Bialasiewicz, Luiza. 2012. “Off-shoring and Out-sourcing the Borders of EUrope: Libya and EU Border Work in the Mediterranean.” Geopolitics 17 (4): 843–66.

Casas-Cortes, Maribel, Sebastian Cobarrubias, and John Pickles. 2013. “Re-bordering the neighbourhood: Europe’s emerging geographies of non-accession integration.” European Urban and Regional Studies 20: 37-58.

Coleman, Mathew, and Austin Kocher. 2011. “Detention, Deportation, Devolution and Immigrant Incapacitation in the US, Post 9/11.” The Geographical Journal 177 (3): 228–37.

Collyer, Michael. 2012. “Deportation and the Micropolitics of Exclusion: The Rise of Removals from the UK to Sri Lanka.” Geopolitics 12 (2): 276-292.

Collyer, Michael, and Russell King. 2015. “Producing Transnational Space International Migration and the Extra-territorial Reach of State Power.” Progress in Human Geography 39 (2): 185–204.

Conlon, Deirdre. 2011. “Waiting: Feminist Perspectives on the Spacings/timings of Migrant (im)mobility.” Gender, Place & Culture 18 (3): 353–60.

Conlon, Deirdre, Nancy Hiemstra, editors. 2016. Intimate Economies of Immigration Detention: Critical Perspectives. Routledge, NY.

Gill, Nicholas. 2009. “Governmental Mobility: The Power Effects of the Movement of Detained Asylum Seekers Around Britain’s Detention Estate.” Political Geography 28 (3): 186–96.

Hyndman, Jennifer, and Wenona Giles. 2011. “Waiting for What? The Feminization of Asylum in Protracted Situations.” Gender, Place & Culture 18 (3): 361–79.

Martin, Lauren. 2011. “The Geopolitics of Vulnerability: Children’s Legal Subjectivity, Immigrant Family Detention and US Immigration Law and Enforcement Policy.” Gender, Place & Culture 18 (4): 477–98.

Mountz, Alison, Kate Coddington, R. Tina Catania, and Jenna M. Loyd. 2013. “Conceptualizing Detention Mobility, Containment, Bordering, and Exclusion.” Progress in Human Geography 37 (4): 522–41.

Mountz, Alison, and Jenna M. Loyd. 2014. “Transnational Productions of Remoteness: Building Onshore and Offshore Carceral Regimes Across Borders.” Geographica Helvetica 69 (5): 389–98.

Ngai, Mae M. 2004. Impossible subjects: Illegal aliens and the making of modern America. Princeton University Press.

Walters, William. 2010. “Deportation, expulsion, and the international police of aliens.” in The Deportation Regime, Eds N de Genova, N Peutz. Duke University Press, Durham, NC:147-165

CfP: Breaking boundaries from bottom to top: Critical approaches to migration

Research on migration is increasingly important in Geography and across disciplines. Yet, too often contemporary research concerning migration is stuck asking the same questions despite a changing political climate, applying top-down perspectives and terminology. As a result of new trends in global migration, classical definitions of individuals and groups, e.g. refugee, non-resident alien, immigrant, etc., often used in research on migration, no longer sufficiently describe current mobilities. In an era when migration is a global phenomenon, and despite the movement against borders (Agnew 2007, 2008; Anderson, Sharma, and Wright 2009), many nation states are implementing new physical and institutional barriers to limit free mobility (Mountz 2010; Jones 2012, 2016). Importantly, the current global political climate is also encouraging dehumanizing  rhetoric and discourse surrounding migration, encouraging violence against minorities in these spaces (Jones 2016, Smith 2016).

This calls for new, innovative ways of elucidating phenomena surrounding migration and the way we research it. For this series of sessions we seek papers that take a critical approach to researching migration. This includes, but is not limited to:

  • Forced migrations, IDPs, Urban refugees, Camps, International refugee crisis
  • Gateway/Non-gateway cities, New Destination, Under-researched origins/destinations
  • Borderland mobilities and externalization of the border, securitization of migration
  • The effects of migration at different scales on sending societies (from regional to family level), analysing/questioning the driving forces causing migration
  • Benefits and losses of migration on sending and hosting societies
  • Diasporic and expatriate communities, Diaspora strategies and engagement
  • More humanizing, creative approaches to migration
  • The effects of borders and rhetoric on everyday communities and people
  • Decolonizing approaches to research on migration

Interested contributors should submit your PIN and an abstract of approximately 250 words to the organizers by October 15, 2017: Dan Johnston (dantjohn@indiana.edu), Christabel Devadoss (cadevadoss@mix.wvu.edu), and Ágnes Erőss (agnes.eross@gmail.com).

CfP: Religion and Identity: Perspectives on Conflict and Peacemaking in Eurasia

The “religious revival” that has occurred across Eurasia since the collapse of communism has been a multi-faceted phenomenon. Far from remaining isolated in the sphere of “private belief and practice,” discourses surrounding religion and identity have become increasingly influential in politics, culture, and society. Religion, broadly conceived, has also been central to different forms of peacemaking throughout the region, as well as playing an important role in conflict situations in a variety of contexts.

The purpose of this session is to provide a forum for the exploration of religion as a site of conflict and peacemaking in Eurasia. We invite contributors to submit theoretical and/or empirically-grounded papers pertaining to themes that include (but are not limited to):

  • Religion & the performance of peace (or conflict) in everyday life
  • Contesting the boundaries of secular and sacred
  • Religion, race, and social justice
  • Nationalism, homeland, mythmaking, and religion
  • Critical approaches to religion and peace
  • Xenophobia, and conflict
  • Religion and the populist resurgence
  • The separation (or not) of church & state
  • Culture wars
  • Indigenous religion
  • Religious perspectives on the environment

Please submit an abstract of approximately 250 words to Vincent Artman (vincent.artman@wayne.edu) by October 20 for consideration.

CfP: Extracting Eurasia: Power, nature, and space in regional context

CFP — Extracting Eurasia: Power, nature, and space in regional context

AAG New Orleans, April 10-14, 2018

Sponsors: Eurasian, Political Geography, and Cultural & Political Ecology Specialty Groups
Organizer: Jesse Swann-Quinn, Syracuse University

Eurasia comprises vast populations, extreme geologic and ecological diversity, and some of the world’s most intractable geopolitical conflicts. The broad region also exhibits intense patterns and histories of resource extraction and capture, providing a cornerstone for many national economies and countless local livelihoods. From mineral and metal mining and fossil fuel drilling, to water use and forest harvesting, the arrangements that govern these extractive practices produce a wide spectrum of political, social, and environmental consequences.

This session brings together individuals whose scholarship contributes to regional understandings of these extractive patterns as they evolve across Eurasia. By encouraging contributions that incorporate political ecology, critical geopolitics, feminist methodologies and other grounded approaches to field work, this session contributes to efforts that encourage a more critical approach to the regional geographies of Eurasia. This call also acknowledges that while global networks of extraction may increasingly defy borders and challenge regional narratives, extraction and commodity chains still create numerous scales of activity from local to global, and beyond. Ultimately, these networks incorporate simultaneously local, national and transnational political and economic assemblages, and understanding the forces that produce these patterns in specifically Eurasian contexts requires a regional perspective grounded in rich, highly contextualized empirics.

This session welcomes contributions that are contemporary or historical, fieldwork driven or theoretical, and from a diversity of methodological practices. Possible topics may include, but are not limited to:

–       Authoritarian or democratizing political environments
–       Local conflict over resource management
–       Corruption among state and corporate entities
–       New materialisms in Eurasia
–       Neoliberal environmental reforms
–       Geopolitics of resource extraction and transport
–       FDI flows across borders
–       Environmental subjectivities and biopolitics
–       Newly emergent international agreements and unions in relation to conservation, resource management, etc. (e.g. Eurasian Economic Union, the One Belt One Road Initiative, etc.)
–       Shifting political identities and narratives of dis/interconnectivity
–       Ecological regionalism

Interested participants should submit inquiries and abstracts for consideration (approximately 250 words) to Jesse Swann-Quinn <jquinn@syr.edu> by October 15th. Authors will be notified by October 20th

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

Call for Papers: AAG Annual Meeting – New Orleans, USA, April 10&#8211;14, 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

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 20. Selections will be made by October 23.

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: Commodifying Humanitarianism: Exploring Business-Humanitarian Partnerships

Call for Papers: Commodifying Humanitarianism: Exploring Business-Humanitarian Partnerships

American Association of Geographers Annual Meeting, New Orleans, April 10-14 2018

Today’s marketplace is inundated with products supporting humanitarian causes that promise to give aid to beneficiaries, provide ‘good feelings’ to consumers and promote the brands of corporations and humanitarian NGOs. When OXFAM International’s webshop optimistically declares, “whatever you decide to buy, your purchase will help to transform people’s lives” it feeds into a contemporary narrative where humanitarian causes, products, and consumers are tied together in seemingly unproblematic ways to ‘save the world’. Central to this contemporary ‘commodification of humanitarianism’ is the expanding and intensifying partnerships between humanitarian NGOs and private corporations at the expense of public donors. However, research on the changing nature of – and motives behind – these business-humanitarian partnerships is in short supply.

This paper session seeks contributions that contextualize and illuminate the specificities of contemporary business-humanitarian partnerships in terms of objectives, motives, and challenges. Contributions could encompass a wide range of contemporary and historical cases that address questions such as:

  • How have humanitarian objectives for partnering with private corporations changed over time?
  • What are the diverse motives (and perceived risks) behind contemporary business-humanitarian partnerships?
  • How do humanitarian NGOs reconcile their ethical and moral authority with business and commercial logics?

Please send your title, abstract, and contact information to Mie Vestergaard (mive@ruc.dk) by October 13, 2017 to be considered for inclusion. Thank you, Mette Fog Olwig and Mie Vestergaard, Roskilde University, https://commodifyingcompassion.wordpress.com/

2nd CfP: The Globalization & Production of Knowledge

This session aims to investigate the effects of globalization on knowledge production throughout the world. Knowledge is socially constructed and undergoes processes of shaping and challenging. Power, influences its construct, which can be controlled and contested. Of interest are the economic, social, political and cultural causes and effects on the creation of facts, information, and skills occurring within the integration or interconnection of places in the world. Both resistance to and spread of knowledge can occur at different places over the globe. Some groups challenge the expansion of knowledge from different places viewing it as oppressive or homogenizing, while others have welcomed it as developmental and beneficial.  With the rise of populist resistance in the West, a new chapter in globalization is taking place with ramifications on the production of knowledge. Equally important is the possibility of the hybridization of local and global knowledge, where combinations and merging of both scales are created and clear demarcations are uncertain. In exploring the globalization of the production of knowledge, this session thus seeks to bring together discussions on theory, methodology (qualitative and quantitative), scale and cases studies.

 

Interested contributors should submit an abstract of approximately 250 words or inquiries regarding the session(s) to Tom Stieve (tomthirteen@email.arizona.edu).

CfP: Geopolitics of Displacement and Exclusion: Making and Unmaking of Refugees

Geopolitics of Displacement and Exclusion: Making and Unmaking of Refugees

 AAG, April 10-14, 2018

New Orleans, LA

Organizers: Kara Dempsey (Appalachian State University) and Orhon Myadar (University of Arizona)

 

As the number of refugees reaches record high globally, refugee issues have been brought to the forefront of political and public debates both nationally and internationally. The public views towards these refugees have been shaped by various mediums that disseminate images and ideas of and about refugees.

This session seeks to conceptualize refugee migration as a critical geopolitical issue and examine the theoretical and practical assumptions surrounding the humanitarian crisis. Invoking Judith Butler’s Precarious Life and Giorgio Agamben’s Bare Life, the session aims to explore the politics of making and unmaking refugees at different scales and in different milieus. Central to our understanding of the politics of refugees is the contradiction between the basic International Relations assumption based on the sanctity of the states and the forces that defy the assumption and the rigidity that comes with it. In exploring the processes of making and unmaking refugees within this contradiction, this session thus seeks to bring together discussions on topics including but not limited to: geopolitics of displacement and bordering (that of exclusion and inclusion; the travel ban); the biopolitics of making/unmaking refugees (coding, registration, incarceration, representation, exploitation and subjugation of refugee bodies); precariousness of refugee lives; refugee stories (production, narration, animation, fetishizing and silencing of refugee narratives; documenting refugee voices), racializing and essentializing tropes of refugees.

Interested contributors should submit an abstract of approximately 250 words to Kara Dempsey (dempseyke@appstate.edu) and Orhon Myadar (orhon@email.arizona.edu) by October 10, 2017.

 

Kara and Orhon

CfP: From Kaepernick and Qatar to Cobb County and the Kop: Critical Geographies of Sports Capitalism

From Kaepernick and Qatar to Cobb County and the Kop: Critical Geographies of Sports Capitalism

Organizer: Andy Walter (University of West Georgia)

Quoting literary theorist Terry Eagleton, “No finer way of resolving the problems of capitalism has been dreamed up” than football (soccer). If this reads as an overstatement, geographer Doreen Massey argued that concerning oneself with the ways in which capital has enclosed football offers a means to understand and, on that basis, to figure out ways to challenge, neoliberalized and financialized society. Recent years have provided spectacular illustrations of both scholars’ claims and their relevance to modern sports generally. From the overt rent-seeking and subversion of local democracy by/for the Atlanta Braves in Cobb County, Georgia, to the deadly exploitation of migrant workers building stadiums for a World Cup serving as a conduit for the circulation of Qatar’s massive surpluses, sport offers a concrete picture of the modes and consequences of wealth extraction and accumulation. At the same time, professional sport provides a view of various ways in which capital’s dominant forms are challenged and grounds are potentially established to create different, less exploitative and unjust ones. For example, by “taking a knee” quarterback Colin Kaepernick inspired a players’ anti-racist movement that exposed the humanity and power of highly-skilled, highly-paid workers and ultimately disrupted the smooth multi-billion dollar flow of value in the NFL (leading NFL owners to collectively withhold work from Kaepernick as an apparent retaliation). Meanwhile, at Liverpool FC’s Anfield Stadium, the loyal supporters of the Kop end, among others elsewhere in the stadium, walked out of a match en masse to contest the narrowing of their role in the club to that of customer and to caution the American owners against treating the club as simply a financial, rather than a community, asset.

 

This session provides a forum for papers exploring the ways in which space and place figure into the operations and outcomes of sports capitalism as well as challenges and alternatives to it at all scales and in any region of the world. Potential topics include, but are not limited to, the connections between the production and consumption of sport as a commodity and:

 

Rent-seeking through land development, media rights, etc.

Labor regulation, exploitation, and organization within and beyond the stadium

Fandom and neoliberal subject formation

Fandom and solidarity

Gender/sexism/gender politics and injustices

Urban politics and citizenship

Democracy and emancipatory politics

Economic governance

Race/racism/racial injustice

Global value chains/production networks

Urban public space

Urban infrastructures

Financialization of the built environment

Commoning and expropriation

Urban and global wealth inequality

 

In you are interested in contributing to this session, please contact Andy Walter (awalter@westga.edu) with a description of your paper’s topic, or any questions you may have about it, by October 18.