Postcritical knowledge ecology in the Anthropocene

Collectively engaging with theory in environmental education research

“…For this reason, we allowed ourselves to individually 'choose' (we acknowledge that the word 'choose' here is possibly problematic for postqualitative research because it may recentre the human researcher) a theoretical concept for his/her analysis, rather than collectively plugging in each concept together as Jackson and Mazzei did. This process enabled each author to engage with his/her data-concept-assemblage more personally and meaningfully, and our collective research methodology to engage and account for each individual researcher's critical subjectivity and interpretation (Nakagawa & Payne, 2019). The dilemma between the less human-centred nonchoosing and the critical (and probably more human-centred) choosing requires further philosophical and methodological attention in environmental education research.…”

“…The above remarks reveal possible gaps between subjectivity and objectivity, critical theory and new materialism, being and becoming, and responsibility and modesty, which all need to be methodologically addressed in environmental education research in the Anthropocene (Nakagawa & Payne, 2019). Due to limited space, our major limitation in this article is therefore that we could not fully consider and address those gaps, particularly the relationship between postqualitative research methodology and individually critical researchers with their particular historicities.…”

“…However, in reality, by having to choose one methodological 'meta-framework' to make the paper work as a whole, and by choosing a postqualitative one closely associated with poststructuralism and/or posthumanism, which not every author in this paper agreed with, this has in practice validated some of our individual approaches more than others. This was a significant methodological and interpersonal challenge we faced, revealing complexities and even paradoxes of combining postqualitative research methodologies and diverse researcher subjectivities (Nakagawa & Payne, 2019). For this reason, our collective methodology may differ from what Jackson and Mazzei (2011) mean by postqualitative research methodology.…”

“…Yoshi engaged with the data by highlighting some 'suicidal' strategies Kelsey had used to challenge the environment-simulacrum. Those subversively deconstructive strategies are useful to unlearn the familiar yet ecologically unsustainable environment-simulacrum for the possibly 'better', inviting a postmodern critical (or postcriticalsee Nakagawa, 2018;Nakagawa & Payne, 2015, 2019 pedagogical approach to environmental education and its research. However, it is anticipated that its deconstructive approach with the strategy of suicide is experimental and risky, at least initially, because it cannot specify any predetermined cognitive, affective, or practical 'outcome' (as may be preferred by some).…”

Introduction to Knowledge For The Anthropocene

“…A more consistent channel of focused contributions has been that of individual papers in scientific journals (e.g., Baghel, 2012;Homsy & Warner, 2013;Seidl et al, 2013;Perret, 2014;Wark & Jandrić, 2016;Delanty & Mota, 2017;Edwards, 2017;Turnhout, 2018;Nakagawa & Payne, 2019;Featherstone, 2020;Jensen, 2020: Schemmel, 2020. The recently published study by Fazey et al (2020) directly addresses issues related to the design of Knowledge Systems for the Anthropocene.…”