CALL FOR PAPERS: AAG 2018, New Orleans

Towards a critical geography of ships

Organizers: Nick Anderman (University of California, Berkeley) and Elizabeth Sibilia (The Graduate Center, The City University of New York)

Discussant: to be announced

 Ships floundering, blocked and struck at sea have made headlines with surprising regularity in the past year. Most recently, non-US flagged ships were controversially prohibited by US law from delivering aid to Puerto Rico for more than a week after Hurricane Maria made landfall, contributing to a steadily worsening humanitarian crisis on the island. This follows fatal collisions between US Naval ships and large commercial vessels in Japanese territorial waters and the South China Sea; a debilitating ransomware attack on the world’s largest container shipping company, A.P. Moller-Maersk; and the mid-2016 bankruptcy of the South Korean container carrier Hanjin, which left the firm’s entire fleet—some 95 ships strewn across the world’s shipping lanes and moored at ports in more than 25 countries––in a state of legal limbo. These events suggest that ships, which for decades have remained largely invisible (Sekula 1995, Sekula and Burch 2010, Hasty and Peters 2012), are increasingly understood to be public matters of concern (Latour 2004, 2008).

A raft of recent scholarship from across the social sciences focuses on ocean-going ships in the context of global logistics and military systems (Chua 2015, Cowen 2014, Danyluk et al. forthcoming), mobility studies (Birtchnell et al. 2015, Hasty and Peters 2012, Peters 2014), and historical geography (Bonner 2016, Hasty 2014). In many of these accounts, ships are taken to be relatively unambiguous objects, with clearly demarcated physical boundaries and straightforward––albeit manifold––cultural meanings. More often than not, they are deployed as signifiers of the reach of globalized capital or as nodes in complex infrastructural assemblages. But just what are ships? What kinds of spaces, knowledge and subjects do they produce and enable, both at sea, on shore, and far inland? How do they shape contemporary life?

Echoing and extending recent calls to put ships at the center of geographic inquiry (Hasty and Peters 2012, Anim-Addo et al 2014), we invite original research, conceptual studies and critical reflections focused on ships. Our starting premise is that there are not immediately obvious­––or uncontestable––meanings for ships. They are always, but never only, political, material, financial, temporal, and conceptual objects, with diffuse and contradictory histories and effects. Contributions may address all kinds of ships and ship-related topics and issues, including shipbreaking, shipbuilding, maritime law, ports and port politics, navigational technologies, the steadily increasing scale of shipping, seafarers, ships in the Black Atlantic, the history and current state of containerization, etc. Critical and speculative work that theorizes ships’ relation(s) to everyday life, broadly construed, is particularly welcome.

We intend to organize 1-2 paper sessions, depending on quantity and quality of submissions, followed by a panel discussion section. To participate, please submit an abstract of 250 words to Nick Anderman (nanderman@berkeley.edu) and Elizabeth Sibilia (esibilia@gradcenter.cuny.edu) by October 22, 2017.

Anim-Addo, A. (2014) “‘The Great Event of the Fortnight’: Steamship Rhythms and Colonial Communication” Mobilities, 9, 3: 369-383.

Anim-Addo, A., Hasty, W., and Peters, K. (2014) “The Mobilities of Ships and Shipped Mobilities” Mobilities, 9, 3: 337-349.

Birtchnell, T., S. Savitzky and J. Urry (2015) ‘Moving cargos’, in Birtchnell, T., S. Savitzky and J. Urry (eds) Cargomobilities: Moving materials in a global age, New York and London: Routledge.

Bonner, R. (2016) “The Salt Water Civil War: Thalassological Approaches, Ocean-Centered Opportunities” The Journal of the Civil War Era, 6, 2: 243-267.

Chua, C. (2015-) ‘The Disorder of Things’ WWW URL http://thedisorderofthings.com/author/charmchua/ (accessed 10.7.2017).

Danyluk, M., Chua, C., Cowen, D., and Khalili, L. (forthcoming) “Introduction. Turbulent Circulation: Towards a Critical Logistics Studies,” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space.

Hasty, W. (2014) “Metamorphosis Afloat: Pirate Ships, Politics and Process, c.1680–1730” Mobilities, 9, 3: 350-468.

Hasty, W. and Peters, K. (2012) “The Ship in Geography and the Geographies of Ships” Geography Compass, 6, 11: 660–676.

Latour, B. (2004) “Why Has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern” Critical Inquiry 30: 225-248.

Latour, B. (2008) What is the Style of Matters of Concern?, Assen: Van Gorcum.

Peters, K. (2014), “Tracking (Im)mobilities at Sea: Ships, Boats and Surveillance Strategies” Mobilities, 9, 3: 414-431.

Sekula, A. (1995) Fish Story, Rotterdam and Düsseldorf: Richter Verlag.

Sekula, A. and N. Burch (2010) The Forgotten Space, directed by Allan Sekula and Noël Burch, Doc.Eye Film, WILDart FILM and Icarus Films, 2010, DVD.

2^nd CFP AAG 2018

Invisible Borders in a Very Bordered World: Subversive Political Geographies in the Twenty-first Century

Organizers:

Joshua Hagen (Northern State University)

Alexander C. Diener (University of Kansas)

We are accustomed to visualizing the world as a mosaic of sovereign states, each possessing its own clearly defined territory. Standard political maps of the world help establish, reinforce, and reify this worldview – literally a view of the world – and its taken-for-granted spatial organization. This neat and tidy worldview obviously obscures a great deal of complexity and messiness, both geographical and otherwise. Despite that, this ‘territorial trap’ (Agnew, 1994) continues to exert a powerful hold as a normative framework guiding statecraft, international relations, and popular perceptions of the world and our proper place within it.

In recent decades, scholars have complicated that normative framework by highlighting the apparent proliferation of alternative spaces within, across, and between state borders. The significance of this proliferation, nevertheless, remains unclear. These irregular spaces could be harbingers of new processes and perspectives of bordering. Alternatively, these apparently subversive political geographies might ultimately serve to reinforce and reify conventional norms, behaviors, and mentalities. It may also be the case that these novel borderings are not novel at all; they have been with us all along but merely obscured by the territorial trap.

This session(s) seeks contributions that contextualize, investigate, and illuminate the afore-noted possibilities. Contributions could encompass a wide range of contemporary and historical cases, as well as theories and methodologies, including but not limited to:

• De facto states (e.g. Transnistria or Somaliland).
• Spaces of irredentism and secessionism (e.g. Russian annexation of Crimea or Moroccan control of Western Sahara).
• Unrecognized and ambiguous territories (e.g. South China Sea or Antarctica).
• Gated communities (e.g. wealthy enclaves in developed countries or expatriate retirement communities in Central America and the Caribbean).
• Spaces of ethnic inclusion and segregation (e.g. immigrant neighborhoods or gang territories).
• Novel borderings of commerce and exchange (e.g. foreign trade zones or export processing zones).
• Places of transit and detention (e.g. immigrant processing centers or sites of extra-jurisdictional detention).
• Spaces of indigeneity (e.g. tribal reservations or sanctuaries for uncontacted peoples).
• Micronations (e.g. Freetown Christiania or Principality of Sealand).
• Fractured states (e.g. Libya or Syria).

Despite being ‘invisible’ on most maps, these borders and the spaces they delineate have a very real, material, and tangible presence and consequences for those people who live within, alongside, and across them.

Potential contributors should submit an abstract of approximately 250 words or inquiries regarding the session(s) to Joshua.Hagen@northern.edu by October 20, 2017.

Thanks,

Josh and Alex

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’

-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

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

April 10-14 2018

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

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).

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

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. 

Call for Papers: AAG Annual Meeting – New Orleans, USA, April 10&#8211;14, 2018

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/

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).