The future lies beneath: Mineral science, resource-making, and the (de)differentiation of the Peruvian underground

Himley, Matthew

doi:10.1016/j.polgeo.2021.102373

Cited by 19 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fantasies and desires of essential national bodies and identities are buttressed by the purported existence of resources of national patrimony lying "deeper than," and thus somehow prior to, those of more recent arrivals (Koch and Perreault, 2018;Marston, 2019;Rogers, 2015;Schmidt, 2020;Simpson, 2019). Histories of geologic science reveal a variety of nation-and race-making endeavors alongside but also beyond the accumulation of capital (Himley, 2021;Quintana-Navarrete, 2022;Yusoff, 2018a). Nonetheless, these vertical dimensions of the nation and identity are multifaceted.…”

Section: Political Geologies Of Wealth Identity and Wastementioning

confidence: 99%

“…I invite “subsurface geographers” to brainstorm how we might foster richer conversations in our examination of these spaces, materialities, and peoples, hopefully before this topic is exhausted and superseded by another trendy “turn.” Geographers might better historicize and explain how and under what conditions an assumption of undynamic inertness came to become hegemonic— if it has been, when it has been, among specific social groups. Histories of science and state-making are beginning to accomplish such a task (Himley, 2021; Yusoff, 2018a). Along these lines, Peters and Turner (2018: 1040) persuasively argue that however insufficient Euclidian spatialities are, they are still “put to work” in, for instance, prison design and policy.…”

Section: Beyond “Filling the Hole”mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Filling the hole? On new geographies of the subsurface

Bosworth

2023

Progress in Human Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A proliferation of examinations of vertical, voluminous, subsurface, subterranean/subaqueous, geological, or underground relationships has emerged in the last few years of geographic thought. This article seeks to summarize four key themes in which the subsurface has gained prominence: geopolitics, natural resource extraction, cultural geographies, and epistemological politics. The article nonetheless critiques ahistorical, presentist, and/or Eurocentric tendencies in accounts of subsurface spaces, topographical verticalities, and the desire to “fill” a supposed “hole” of subsurface geographies. Altogether, I call for more precise, comparative, and historicized interpretations of the varieties of spatial relations above and below the surface of the earth.

show abstract

Section: Political Geologies Of Wealth Identity and Wastementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Beyond “Filling the Hole”mentioning

confidence: 99%

Filling the hole? On new geographies of the subsurface

Bosworth

2023

Progress in Human Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…STS scholars point out how the authority of underground science depends on its position in specific political economies (Braun, 2000; Frederiksen, 2013) and that the ‘logics and aims of Earth science may not fully intersect with those of capital and the state’ (Himley, 2021: 2). In Semarang, land subsidence science clearly does not align with these extraction-oriented logics.…”

Section: Spokespersons and The Effectivity Of Land Susbidence Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Destabilizing the science of soils: Geoscientists as spokespersons for land subsidence in Semarang, Indonesia

Belland,

Kooy,

Zwarteveen

2023

Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we explore how land subsidence is scientifically known in the coastal city of Semarang, Indonesia. We do so to ask questions about how the authority of this scientific knowledge is or not effective to help slow down land subsidence? We examine the scientific methods used to measure where, and at what rate, subsidence occurs, and we inventory the theories mobilized to interpret and explain them. Our analysis shows how land subsidence resists being fully or unambiguously known; its science remains somewhat speculative. We explore how, in Semarang, but also more broadly, this makes it difficult for subsidence scientists to act as effective ‘spokespersons’ for subsidence; their predictions lack certainty and confidence. As we follow the subsidence debates in Semarang we document how subsidence scientists need the authority of science to speak convincingly to powerful elite coalitions of government agencies and private companies, who have vested interests in ignoring or denying their role in causing or accelerating subsidence. We identify this as one reason why subsidence scientists deploy great efforts to present themselves, and their science, as separate from politics and society, as detached and therefore objective. Beyond contributing to emergent discussions in science and technology studies about how science shapes underground politics, our analysis opens up and sheds new light on the question of how scientific facts become entangled with politics in societal controversies.

show abstract

The construction, solidification and political implications of geographical scientific facts: A perspective on the ‘changing’ Arctic region

Väätänen

2022

Geoforum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The future lies beneath: Mineral science, resource-making, and the (de)differentiation of the Peruvian underground

Cited by 19 publications

References 34 publications

Filling the hole? On new geographies of the subsurface

Filling the hole? On new geographies of the subsurface

Destabilizing the science of soils: Geoscientists as spokespersons for land subsidence in Semarang, Indonesia

The construction, solidification and political implications of geographical scientific facts: A perspective on the ‘changing’ Arctic region

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About