This article details the epistemic politics that shape the climate adaptation of sea defense in Guyana. Rethinking the material arrangements of expertise in the Anthropocene, I track the work of a group of technoscientific experts participating in the Guyana Mangrove Restoration Project (GMRP). In an attempt to redesign sea defense around mangrove ecosystems, GMRP participants recognize that climate adaptation is not solely dependent on their well‐intentioned efforts. As research objects, mangroves are not only forms of evidence but also tools that guide expert action and distinctions in day‐to‐day labor. Moreover, mangroves draw out the explicit contingencies of modeling, placing expert groups in tension with one another as each seeks to advance their own ideas for mangrove protection, management, or change. I show that this relational ontology is emblematic of climate‐adaptation policy's broader operative logics, or what I call inverse performativity. This is a process whereby an unruly world forces one expert group to seek help from others, building a new ecology of expertise to adapt to a changing climate. Impermanent and wondrous, mangroves urge us to think more creatively about vulnerability to climate change and the kinds of practices that inspire knowledge about it.

This article examines the interlocking of nature and race within the overarching framework of the turn toward an idiom of ‘preparedness’ in disaster expertise in Guyana. Tracking the question of racial insecurity following disastrous floods in 2005, the article discusses disaster preparedness interventions as working against the country’s process toward postsocialist racial democratization. In this respect, disaster preparedness has had contradictory effects on security and has enacted a sort of public critique and humor about its inaptness. On the basis of this ethnographic case, the article argues that a practice and language of preparedness is as much about technocratic know-how as it is a style of political humor itself. In this theorization, preparedness is more than contingent, and so is a necessary temporal moment in which people work to imagine a new relationship to nature in recognition of their everyday life molded to environmental and racial-political vulnerability.

The authors present a case of Salmonella sepsis and meningitis with a recurrence of the meningitis in a 36-year-old Hispanic, male AIDS patient. They discuss the mechanisms and routes in general and speculate on these items in this patient from the information available. Meningitis diagnosis and treatment in general and specifically in Salmonella cases are reviewed as well as the variations in AIDS patients. The probable reasons for the recurrence and etiology are discussed.

In Engineering Vulnerability Sarah E. Vaughn examines climate adaptation against the backdrop of ongoing processes of settler colonialism and the global climate change initiatives that seek to intervene in the lives of the world’s most vulnerable. Her case study is Guyana in the aftermath of the 2005 catastrophic flooding that ravaged the country’s Atlantic coastal plain. The country’s ensuing engineering projects reveal the contingencies of climate adaptation and the capacity of flooding to shape Guyanese expectations about racial (in)equality. Analyzing the coproduction of race and vulnerability, Vaughn details why climate adaptation has implications for how we understand the past and the continued human settlement of a place. Such understandings become particularly apparent not only through experts’ and ordinary citizens’ disputes over resources but in their attention to the ethical practice of technoscience over time. Approaching climate adaptation this way, Vaughn exposes the generative openings as well as gaps in racial thinking for theorizing climate action, environmental justice, and, more broadly, future life on a warming planet.<br><br>Duke University Press Scholars of Color First Book Award recipient

Drawing on the work of Black feminist scholars, this review suggests “intersectional ecologies” as a method for critically engaging anthropology's relationship with the environment across subfields, intellectual traditions, and authorial politics. Intersectional ecologies helps us trace how a broad coalition of scholars represents and accounts for the environment within shifting planetary arrangements of bodies, sites, practices, and technologies. Our basic argument in this article is that because the environment is a malleable and contingent social fact, it matters who is analyzing its formation and how they are analyzing it. To this end, the scholarship we review comes from a diverse array of authors. The three themes we have identified—materiality, knowledge, and subjectivity—are central to bringing this diverse scholarship into dialogue while putting into focus anthropology's uneven commitments to the environment as a concept. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Anthropology, Volume 50 is October 2021. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.