Introduction: Affective Ecologies and Conservation

Singh, Neera M.

doi:10.4103/cs.cs_18_33

Cited by 56 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Commoning is not simply a rational, conscious act of getting involved in a collective practice. As has been recently developed by several scholars, commoning emerges from, and creates, emotional ties to place, community, resources/non-humans (Singh 2017(Singh , 2018 and it is through these subjections that new political communities emerge (Nightingale 2011a(Nightingale , 2013; González-Hidalgo and Zografos 2017; Velicu and García-López 2018; González-Hidalgo and Zografos 2019). Affective subjectivities are relationally produced between people, non-humans and everyday practice, meaning that subjects are not (un) consciously rearticulated by individuals, but rather imply a sense of self that refuses the boundary between individuals and their socionatural environments (Davidson 2003;Nightingale 2013).…”

Section: Performing Commoning: Socionatures and Affectmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…For my purposes here, I want to probe how power operates within the commons to create inclusions and exclusions. Being a commoner is not a state of being, but rather a performative set of relations wherein the exercise of power brings people and non-humans into life giving relations 2 (García López et al 2017;Singh 2017Singh , 2018Velicu and García-López 2018). The presence of strong communitarian relations does not necessarily lead to commoning for all, nor does it necessarily foster nurturing relations with non-humans.…”

Section: Performing Commoning: Socionatures and Affectmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Commoning for inclusion? commons, exclusion, property and socio-natural becomings

Nightingale

2019

Int J Commons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As a response to the march of privatization and neoliberal individualism, the commons have recently re-emerged as an attractive alternative. In this article, I bring a feminist political ecology critique to the burgeoning literature on c ommoning to develop a conceptualisation of how political communities of commoning emerge through socionatural subjectification and affective relations. All commoning efforts involve a renegotiation of the (contested) political relationships through which everyday community affairs, production and exchange are organised and governed. Drawing on critical property studies, diverse economies, feminist theory and commoning literatures, this analysis critically explores the relationship between property and commoning to reveal how the commons emerge from the exercise of power. Central to my conceptualisation is that commoning is a set of practices and performances that foster new relations and subjectivities, but these relations are always contingent, ambivalent outcomes of the exercise of power. As such, commoning creates socionatural inclusions and exclusions, and any moment of coming together can be succeeded by new challenges and relations that uncommon. I argue for the need to focus on doing commoning, becoming in common, rather than seeking to cement property rights, relations of sharing and collective practices as the backbone of durable commoning efforts. Becoming in common then, is a partial, transitory becoming, one which needs to be (re)performed to remain stable over time and space.

show abstract

Section: Performing Commoning: Socionatures and Affectmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Performing Commoning: Socionatures and Affectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Commoning for inclusion? commons, exclusion, property and socio-natural becomings

Nightingale

2019

Int J Commons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…What I name 'emotional environmentalism' refers to the role that emotions have in fostering everyday political subjectivities and mobilisation for the defence of the commons. This emotional environmentalism includes the everyday affective labour developed by commoners in their socio-nature encounters (Singh, 2013(Singh, , 2018, but also the affective labour that activists do when coping with their collective disruptive feelings associated to the dispossession of their livelihood commons. As I will show in the next paragraphs, a variety of daily emotions and emotional practices -or 'the wonder of minor experiences' (Bennett, 2016) -function, for local communities, as inspiration to be engaged in being-in-common as environmental or land defenders, and reflect upon their activism while being exposed to acute conflict.…”

Section: Fostering Being-in-common: Emotional Environmentalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ambivalent political work of emotions in the defence of territory, life and the commons

González‐Hidalgo

2020

Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing focus that political ecologists are putting in the role of emotions and affect in environmental conflict, commoning and mobilisation is enriching mainstream analyses that tended to mask the everyday emotional engagements of environmental movements, collectives and communities associated to being exposed to conflict as well as being active in it. By directing attention to two different ways in which grassroots movements and communities in Chile and Mexico facilitate emotional expression in the context of the conflicts in which they are embedded in, I discuss what different roles emotion plays in the defence of the commons, and what political opportunities these different roles imply for movements and collectives. I found a persistent and unresolved tension between the role of emotions as channels for the subversion of hegemonic power, and their role in reproducing hegemonic power dynamics. I suggest that this reveals ‘the emotional’ as a space of power and conflict, and that acknowledging the ambivalent political work of emotions offers opportunities for both researchers and movements to better understand and transform the power inequalities associated to the defence and practice of being-in-common while being exposed to conflict and dispossession.

show abstract

“…In selecting photovoice as a framework of practice, I sought a more collaborative approach for speaking directly to the political stakes of conservation and injustices enacted through the management of contested environments by those experiencing the impact of these politics in their everyday lives. In a recent special issue on the subject of affective ecologies and conservation, Singh (2018) notes that while the turn towards affect theory in geography and related disciplines has grown exponentially in the past two decades, a concern remains that ''the affective turn can lead to an apolitical focus on biophysical processes or on proximate attachments that neglect the complex histories, cultures, and issues of conflict and incompatibility'' (2). Approaching photovoice as a means of attuning to conservation's affects also becomes a means of responding to criticisms that more-than-human and posthuman-inflected research ignores pressing questions of politics and justice in favor of attention to the affects of individual beings and the ''liveliness'' of things (for a review of these debates, see Braun, 2015;Fraser, 1997;Panelli, 2010;Ruddick, 2010Ruddick, , 2017Singh, 2018).…”

Section: Collaboratingmentioning

confidence: 99%

On coming into animal presence with photovoice

Margulies

2019

Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Methodological advancement within more-than-human geography lags behind its theorization. As an intervention into the promise of visual methods for enlivening more-than-human geographies, I describe working with a photographic practice for exploring geographies of encounter between humans, the animals they care for, and wild animals. This is presented through discussing a collaborative project employing photovoice to explore wildlife conservation politics in a landscape where both humans and animals have the capacity to kill, and be killed, by one another. Through engaging with photographs and text produced over the course of six months by six individuals living in close proximity to Bandipur National Park in Karnataka, India, I explore entangled relations between humans and animals and the production of more-than-human hierarchies. I consider the potential of a visual method for practicing more-than-human geographies as an exploration of affective encounters. This paper contributes to on-going discussions and debates on decolonizing more-than-human geographies. More specifically, I suggest photovoice as one means by which more-than-human geographies can remain critically engaged with and speak out against enactments of injustice and violent legacies of colonialism that reach across species divides.

show abstract

Introduction: Affective Ecologies and Conservation

Cited by 56 publications

References 52 publications

Commoning for inclusion? commons, exclusion, property and socio-natural becomings

Commoning for inclusion? commons, exclusion, property and socio-natural becomings

The ambivalent political work of emotions in the defence of territory, life and the commons

On coming into animal presence with photovoice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About