Advertisement

Environmental Violence and Postnatural Oceans: Low-Trophic Theory in the Registers of Feminist Posthumanities

Chapter
  • 120 Downloads
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Victims and Victimology book series (PSVV)

Abstract

Environmental violence takes form of both ‘spectacular’ events, like ecological disasters usually recognised by the general public, and ‘slow violence’, a type of violence that occurs gradually, out of sight and on a long-term scale. Planetary seas and oceans, loaded with cultural meanings of that which ‘hides’ and ‘allows to forget’, are the spaces where such attritional violence unfolds unseen and ‘out of mind’. Simultaneously, conventional concepts of nature and culture, as dichotomous entities, become obsolete. We all inhabit and embody the world differently, as variously situated people, divided by national, sexual, bodily and economic status, and as very variously situated nonhumans in an increasingly anthropogenic world. This chapter focuses on subtle ‘slow violence’ unfolding through the instances of submerged chemical weapons, so-called dead zones, invasive species and high- and low-trophic mariculture in the Baltic and North Sea regions. It zooms in on the select cases of such ‘environed bodies’, their stories of excruciating slow violence and yet also on unexpected encounters with care and hospitality. The aim is to unfold a low-trophic theory for the naturecultural research on violence and care within environmental humanities, and to engage a coexistential ethics of environmental adaptability informed by feminist posthumanities.

Keywords

Environmental violence Seas and oceans Low-trophic theory Feminist posthumanities 

References

  1. Alaimo, S. (2010). Bodily natures: Science, environment and the material self. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Alaimo, S. (2012). States of suspension: Trans-corporeality at sea. Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment, 19(3), 476–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alaimo, S. (2016). Exposed: Environmental politics and pleasure in posthuman times. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  4. Alexandratos, N., & Bruinsma, J. (2012). World agriculture towards 2030/2050: The 2012 revision (ESA Working Paper No. 12-03). Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
  5. Åsberg, C. (2014). Imagining posthumanities, enlivening feminisms. In B. Blaagaard & I. van der Tuin (Eds.), The subject of Rosi Braidotti: politics and concepts (pp. 56–64). Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  6. Åsberg, C. (2018). Feminist posthumanities in the anthropocene: Forays into the postnatural. Journal of Posthuman Studies: Philosophy, Technology, Media, 1(2), 185–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Åsberg, C., & Braidotti, R. (2018). A Feminist companion to the posthumanities. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Åsberg, C., Holmstedt, J., & Radomska, M. (2020). Methodologies of kelp: Transversal knowledge production and multispecies ethics in an age of entanglement. In N. Cahoon, H. Mehti, & A. Wolfsberger (Eds.), The kelp congress. The North Norwegian Art Centre: Svolvær.Google Scholar
  9. Bladow, K., & Ladino, J. (2018). Affective ecocriticism: Emotion, embodiment, environment. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bryld, M., & Lykke, N. (2000). Cosmodolphins: Feminist cultural studies of technology, animals and the sacred. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Buchanan, B., Bastian, M., & Chrulew, M. (2018). Introduction: Field philosophy and other experiments. Parallax, 24(4), 383–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Butt, N., Lambrick, F., Menton, M., & Renwick, A. (2019). The supply chain of violence. Nature Sustainability, 2, 742–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. CHEMSEA. (2014). CHEMSEA Findings: Results from the CHEMSEA Project—Chemical munitions search and assessment. Gdansk: Institute of Oceanology Polish Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  14. Cunsolo, A., & Landman, K. (Eds.). (2017). Mourning nature: Hope at the heart of ecological loss and grief. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Diaz, R. J., & Rosenberg, R. (2008). Spreading dead zones and consequences for marine ecosystems. Science, 321(5891), 926–929 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1156401.
  16. Doka, K. (1989). Disenfranchised grief: Recognizing hidden sorrow. Lexington: Lexington Press.Google Scholar
  17. EASAC. (2017). Opportunities and challenges for research on food and nutrition security and agriculture in Europe. European Academies’ Science Advisory Council (EASAC).Google Scholar
  18. EC Communication. (2009). Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, 10.6.2009 Sec (2009) 712. Commission Staff Working Document.Google Scholar
  19. European Environment Agency (EEA). (2015). Regulation on invasive alien species (Document number: 1143/2014/EU).Google Scholar
  20. European Geosciences Union. (2018, July 5). New study: Oxygen loss in the coastal Baltic Sea is ‘unprecedentedly severe’ | EurekAlert! Science News. https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2018-07/egu-nso070318.php. Accessed 1 May 2020.
  21. Filbee-Dexter, K., Feehan, C. J., & Scheibling, R. E. (2016). Large-scale degradation of a kelp ecosystem in an ocean warming hotspot. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 543, 141–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Filbee-Dexter, K., & Wernberg, T. (2018). Rise of Turfs: A new battlefront for globally declining kelp forests. BioScience, 68(2), 64–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Giraud, E. H. (2019). What comes after entanglement? Activism, anthropocentrism, and an ethics of exclusion. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Haraway, D. J. (1991). Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Haraway, D. J. (2008). When the species meet. Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  26. Haraway, D. J. (2016). Staying with the trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Harper, D. (n.d.). Trophic. Online Etymology Dictionary. https://www.etymonline.com/word/trophic#etymonline_v_39458. Accessed 1 May 2020.
  28. HELCOM. (2012). Observed non-indigenous and cryptogenic species in the Baltic Sea. HELCOM Baltic Sea Environment Fact Sheets. http://www.helcom.fi/baltic-sea-trends/environment-fact-sheets/. Accessed 1 May 2020.
  29. HELCOM. (2018). State of the Baltic Sea—Second HELCOM holistic assessment 2011–2016. Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings 155.Google Scholar
  30. Jokinen, S. A., Virtasalo, J. J., Jilbert, T., Kaiser, J., Dellwig, O., Arz, H. W., et al. (2018). A 1500-year multiproxy record of coastal hypoxia from the northern Baltic Sea indicates unprecedented deoxygenation over the 20th century. Biogeosciences, 15, 3975–4001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Littfass, D. (2019). Biofouling: Aliens in the Baltic Sea. Research & Innovation News. Open Access Government. https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/aliens-in-the-baltic/67537/. Accessed 1 May 2020.
  32. MacCormack, P. (2020). The Ahuman Manifesto. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  33. Missiaen, T., & Henriet, J. (2002). Chemical munition dump sites in coastal environments. Brussels: Federal Office for Scientific, Technical and Cultural Affairs.Google Scholar
  34. Neimanis, A. (2017). Bodies of water: Posthuman feminist phenomenology. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  35. Neimanis, A., Åsberg, C., & Hedrén, J. (2015). Four problems, four directions for environmental humanities: Toward critical posthumanities for the Anthropocene. Ethics & the Environment, 20(1), 67–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nixon, R. (2011). Slow violence: Environmentalism of the poor. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ojaveer, H., Jaanus, A., MacKenzie, B. R., Martin, G., Olenin, S., Radziejewska, T., et al. (2010). Status of biodiversity in the Baltic Sea. PLoS ONE. 5(9), e12467 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0012467.
  38. Olenin, S., & Leppäkoski, E. (1999). Non-native animals in the Baltic Sea: alteration of benthic habitats in coastal inlets and lagoons. Hydrobiologia, 393, 233–243 (1999).  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003511003766.
  39. Peterson, J. (2018). Are dead zones dead? Environmental collapse in popular media about eutrophication. In A. Vogelaar, B. Hale, & A. Peat (Eds.), The discourses of environmental collapse: Imagining the end. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  40. Radomska, M. (2020). Deterritorialising Death: Queerfeminist Biophilosophy and Ecologies of the Non/Living in Contemporary Art. Australian Feminist Studies, 35(104), 116–137.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08164649.2020.1802697.
  41. Radomska, M., & Åsberg, C. (2020). Doing away with life: On biophilosophy, the non/living, toxic embodiment, and reimagining ethics. In E. Berger, K. Mäki-Reinikka, K. O’Reilly, & H. Sederholm (Eds.), Art as we don’t know it (pp. 54–63). Helsinki: Aalto ARTS Books.Google Scholar
  42. Radomska, M., Mehrabi, T., Lykke, N. (2019). Queer death studies: Coming to terms with death, dying and mourning differently. An introduction. Women, Gender & Research (3–4), 3–11.Google Scholar
  43. Rose, D. B. (2006). “Moral friends” in the zone of disaster. Tamkang Review, 37(1), 77–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rose, D. B. (2012). Multispecies knots of ethical time. Environmental Philosophy, 9(1), 127–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rose, D. B., van Doorenb, T., Chrulewb, M., Cookec, S., Kearnesb, M., & O’Gormand, E. (2012). Thinking through the environment, unsettling the humanities. Environmental Humanities, 1, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sapea. (2017). Food from the Oceans—How can more food and biomass be obtained from the oceans in a way that does not deprive future generations of their benefits? (SAPEA Evidence Review Report No. 1). Berlin: SAPEA.Google Scholar
  47. Schiermeier, Q. (2003). Fish farms’ threat to salmon stocks exposed. Nature, 425, 753 (2003).  https://doi.org/10.1038/425753a.
  48. Stigebrandt, A. (2012). Evaluating geoengineering as a method to revive Baltic Sea dead zones. Sea Technology, 2012(12), 89.Google Scholar
  49. Tsing, A. L., Swanson, H. A., Gan, E., & Bubandt, N. (Eds.). (2017). Arts of the living on a damaged planet: Ghosts and monsters of the anthropocene. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  50. Zhang, J., Cowie, G., Naqvi, S. W. A. (2013). Hypoxia in a changing marine environment. Environmental Research Letters, 8, 015025 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/1/015025.

Copyright information

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.KTH Royal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden
  2. 2.Linköping UniversityLinköpingSweden
  3. 3.Department of Thematic Studies (Gender Studies)Linköping UniversityLinköpingSweden

Personalised recommendations