Agencies, temporalities, and spatialities in Hiroshima’s post-war reconstruction: a case of reflexive peacebuilding in the Anthropocene?

IF 0.2 3区 历史学 Q2 HISTORY War & Society Pub Date : 2023-10-25 DOI:10.1080/07292473.2023.2273033
Dahlia Simangan
{"title":"Agencies, temporalities, and spatialities in Hiroshima’s post-war reconstruction: a case of reflexive peacebuilding in the Anthropocene?","authors":"Dahlia Simangan","doi":"10.1080/07292473.2023.2273033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AbstractThis article revisits the case of Hiroshima’s post-war reconstruction using the lens of reflexive peacebuilding. Reflexive peacebuilding is a set of practices that align peacebuilding efforts with the notions of agency, time, and space, as problematised within the critical discourse on the Anthropocene. For this study, a review of relevant policies and initiatives following the bombing reveals how agencies, temporalities, and spatialities in Hiroshima’s post-war reconstruction generate interweaving and sometimes contesting peace narratives. Hiroshima’s experience in responding to the needs of the survivors, accommodating future generations, and using spaces for peace promotion offer insights into the blurred agency, uncertain times, and porous spaces of Anthropocene imaginaries.Keywords: Post-war reconstructionpeacebuildingreflexive peacebuildingAnthropoceneHiroshima AcknowledgementsI am grateful to the editorial team of War & Society and the anonymous reviewers for their comments on the earlier version of this paper. I also wish to acknowledge the research assistance of Kazuma Sugano for the selection and translation of relevant documents used in the analysis of this paper.Disclosure statementThe authors declare there is no conflict of interest in this study.Notes1 Colin N. Waters et al., ‘Can Nuclear Weapons Fallout Mark the Beginning of the Anthropocene Epoch?’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 71, no. 3 (2015), 46–57.2 John S. Dryzek and Jonathan Pickering, The Politics of the Anthropocene (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019).3 Dahlia Simangan, ‘Reflexive Peacebuilding: Lessons from the Anthropocene Discourse’, Global Society 35, no. 4 (2021), 479–500.4 UN, ‘An Agenda for Peace: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-Keeping’, 31 January 1992, para. 57, https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/145749?ln=en [accessed 19 May 1923].5 Several indigenous studies scholars have emphasised the experiences of societies and communities subjected to colonialism, slavery, and imperialism in dealing with the loss of life, land, and relationships. These experiences are exacerbated by global environmental change and left unaddressed by the power asymmetries underpinning the global politics of climate action: Heather Davis and Zoe Todd, ‘On the Importance of a Date, Or, Decolonizing the Anthropocene’, ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies 16, no. 4 (2017), 761–80; Audra Mitchell, ‘Beyond Biodiversity and Species: Problematizing Extinction’, Theory, Culture & Society 33, no. 5 (2016), 23–42; Kyle P. Whyte, ‘Indigenous Science (Fiction) for the Anthropocene: Ancestral Dystopias and Fantasies of Climate Change Crises’, Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space 1, no. 1–2 (2018), 224–42.6 Simon Dalby, ‘Framing the Anthropocene: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly’, The Anthropocene Review 3, no. 1 (2016), 33–51.7 The policy review conducted for this paper is limited to publicly available documents that summarise the policies and initiatives undertaken by Hiroshima’s prefectural government and Hiroshima City’s municipal government. Hiroshima for Global Peace (HGP) has published several volumes in English containing the historical background and comprehensive reviews of Hiroshima’s reconstruction. These policies and initiatives were categorised according to decades, from 1945 until 2020, with each decade containing the said policies and initiatives relevant to the research questions. Due to the Japanese language limitation of the author, this paper extensively draws on HGP’s relevant publications available at <https://hiroshimaforpeace.com/en/> [accessed 19 May 2023]. A research assistant who is fluent in the Japanese language searched and translated other relevant scholarly articles and government documents that are written in Japanese.8 These questions do not aim to provide a comprehensive historical account of Hiroshima’s post-war reconstruction. It must be recognised that there is no single narrative or perspective to this part of Japan’s history. Differing and often competing ideologies and interests among national parties, labour unions, peace movements, politicians, and other interest groups have influenced the process of post-war reconstruction and peace promotion in Hiroshima and elsewhere in varying degrees.9 Paul J. Crutzen and Eugene F. Stoermer, ‘The Anthropocene’, International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme Newsletter, no. 41 (2000), 17–8.10 Dahlia Simangan, ‘Situating the Asia Pacific in the Age of the Anthropocene’, Australian Journal of International Affairs 73, no. 6 (2019), 564–84.11 Jason W. Moore, ed., Anthropocene or Capitalocene?: Nature, History, and the Crisis of Capitalism, 1st ed. (Oakland, CA: PM Press, 2016).12 Giovanna Di Chiro, ‘Welcome to the White (M)Anthropocene? A Feminist-Environmentalist Critique’, in Routledge Handbook of Gender and Environment, ed. by Sherilyn MacGregor (Oxon and New York: Routledge, 2017), 487–505; Nancy Tuana, ‘Climate Apartheid: The Forgetting of Race in the Anthropocene’, Critical Philosophy of Race 7, no. 1 (2019), 1–31.13 Jeremy Baskin, ‘Paradigm Dressed as Epoch: The Ideology of the Anthropocene’, Environmental Values 24, no. 1 (2015), 11.14 Several studies point to different transitions in geological history, marking the onset of the Anthropocene. For a review of these transitions: Simon L. Lewis and Mark A. Maslin, ‘Defining the Anthropocene’, Nature 519, no. 7542 (2015), 171–80.15 Halvard Buhaug, Nils Petter Gleditsch, and Ole Magnus Theisen, ‘Implications of Climate Change for Armed Conflict’, Social Dimensions of Climate Change Workshop (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2008); Ken Conca and Geoffrey D. Dabelko, eds, Environmental Peacemaking (Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 2002); Vally Koubi, ‘Climate Change and Conflict’, Annual Review of Political Science 22, no. 1 (2019), 343–60.16 Eva Lövbrand and Malin Mobjörk, eds, Anthropocene (In)Securities: Reflections on Collective Survival 50 Years After the Stockholm Conference (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021); Ignasi Torrent, ‘An Introduction to “Peace, Conflicts and Security in the Anthropocene: Ruptures and Limits”’, Revista de Estudios En Seguridad Internacional 7, no. 1 (2021), i–vi; Paul Heikkurinen, Sustainability and Peaceful Coexistence for the Anthropocene (Oxfordshire and New York: Routledge, 2017); Rhys Kelly, ‘Avoiding the “Anthropocene”?: An Assessment of the Extent and Nature of Engagement with Environmental Issues in Peace Research’, Peace and Conflict Studies 27, no. 3 (2021), article 3.17 Hans Günter Brauch, ‘Sustainable Peace in the Anthropocene: Towards Political Geoecology and Peace Ecology’, in Handbook on Sustainability Transition and Sustainable Peace, ed. by Hans Günter Brauch et al., Hexagon Series on Human and Environmental Security and Peace (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016), 187–236; Simon Dalby, ‘Peace in the Anthropocene’, Peace Review 25, no. 4 (2013), 561–67; Simangan, ‘Reflexive Peacebuilding’.18 Simangan, ‘Reflexive Peacebuilding’.19 Jack L. Amoureux and Brent J. Steele, Reflexivity and International Relations: Positionality, Critique, and Practice (Oxon: Routledge, 2016).20 Matthew Eagleton-Pierce, ‘Examining the Case for Reflexivity in International Relations: Insights from Bourdieu’, Journal of Critical Globalisation Studies 1, no. 1 (2009), 111–23.21 Inanna Hamati-Ataya, ‘Reflexivity and International Relations’, International Relations, 2020; Brooke Ackerly and Jacqui True, ‘Reflexivity in Practice: Power and Ethics in Feminist Research on International Relations’, International Studies Review 10, no. 4 (2008), 693–707; Cecelia Lynch, ‘Reflexivity in Research on Civil Society: Constructivist Perspectives’, International Studies Review 10, no. 4 (2008), 708–21.22 Dryzek and Pickering, 17.23 Ibid.24 Ibid.25 Simangan, ‘Reflexive Peacebuilding’.26 Ibid.27 David Chandler, Ontopolitics in the Anthropocene: An Introduction to Mapping, Sensing and Hacking (Oxon and New York: Routledge, 2017); David Chandler and Julian Reid, Becoming Indigenous: Governing Imaginaries in the Anthropocene (London: Rowman & Littlefield, 2019).28 Matt McDonald, Ecological Security: Climate Change and the Construction of Security (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021).29 Simangan, ‘Reflexive Peacebuilding’.30 Shahrbanou Tadjbakhsh, ed., Rethinking the Liberal Peace: External Models and Local Alternatives (Oxon: Routledge, 2011); Edward Newman, Roland Paris and Oliver P. Richmond, New Perspectives on Liberal Peacebuilding (Tokyo: United Nations University Press, 2009).31 Roger Mac Ginty and Oliver P. Richmond, ‘The Local Turn in Peace Building: A Critical Agenda for Peace’, Third World Quarterly 34, no. 5 (2013), 763–83.32 Oliver P. Richmond, ‘A Post-Liberal Peace: Eirenism and the Everyday’, Review of International Studies 35, no. 3 (2009), 557–80; Roger Mac Ginty, Everyday Peace: How So-Called Ordinary People Can Disrupt Violent Conflict, Studies in Strategic Peacebuilding (New York: Oxford University Press, 2021); Cedric de Coning, ‘Adaptive Peacebuilding’, International Affairs 94, no. 2 (2018), 301–17.33 Roger Mac Ginty, International Peacebuilding and Local Resistance: Hybrid Forms of Peace (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011); Oliver P. Richmond, A Post-Liberal Peace (London and New York: Routledge, 2011); Tadjbakhsh.34 Oliver P. Richmond, ‘Beyond Local Ownership in the Architecture of International Peacebuilding’, Ethnopolitics 11, no. 4 (2012), 354–75.35 Richmond, ‘A Post-Liberal Peace’, 566.36 Mac Ginty and Richmond, ‘The Local Turn in Peace Building’.37 Dahlia Simangan, International Peacebuilding and Local Involvement: A Liberal Renaissance? (Routledge, 2019).38 de Coning.39 Dryzek and Pickering, 105.40 Eileen Crist, ‘The Reaches of Freedom: A Response to An Ecomodernist Manifesto’, Environmental Humanities 7, no. 1 (2016), 245–54; Madeleine Fagan, ‘Security in the Anthropocene: Environment, Ecology, Escape’, European Journal of International Relations 23, no. 2 (2017), 292–314; Dipesh Chakrabarty, ‘Planetary Crises and the Difficulty of Being Modern’, Millennium 46, no. 3 (2018), 259–82.41 Edward Newman, ‘A Human Security Peace-Building Agenda’, Third World Quarterly 32, no. 10 (2011), 1737–56; Pamina Firchow, Reclaiming Everyday Peace: Local Voices in Measurement and Evaluation After War (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018).42 Simangan, ‘Reflexive Peacebuilding’, 490.43 Land Rezoning Division, Urban Development Department, Urban Development Bureau, the City of Hiroshima, and Editorial Society for the Records of Postwar Reconstruction Project, ed., Sensai Fukkoh Jigyoushi [The Records of Postwar Reconstruction Project] (Hiroshima: and Rezoning Division, Urban Development Department, Urban Development Bureau, the City of Hiroshima, 1995).44 ‘Hiroshima for Global Peace’ Plan Joint Project Executive Committee (Hiroshima Prefecture and The City of Hiroshima), Hiroshima’s Path to Reconstruction, 2nd edition (Hiroshima: ‘Hiroshima for Global Peace’ Plan Joint Project Executive Committee (Hiroshima Prefecture and The City of Hiroshima), 2020).45 S. Ubuki, ‘II Peace Movements’, in Learning from Hiroshima’s Reconstruction Experience: Reborn from the Ashes, ed. by ‘Hiroshima for Global Peace’ Plan Joint Project Executive Committee (Hiroshima Prefecture and The City of Hiroshima, 2014), 157.46 Ubuki, ‘II Peace Movements’.47 ‘Hiroshima for Global Peace’ Plan Joint Project Executive Committee.48 Ibid.49 K. Mizumoto, ‘Part II Questions for Hiroshima: FAQ on Reconstruction of Hiroshima’, in Hiroshima’s Path to Reconstruction, 25–38.50 Ibid., 31.51 Ibid.52 Noriyuki Kawano and Luli van der Does, ‘Heritage of the Atomic-Bomb Experience: What Needs to Be Conveyed?’ Hiroshima Peace Science 39 (2017), 69–93.53 Mizumoto, 34.54 Ibid.55 Ibid.56 Satoru Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi [Hiroshima’s Postwar History] (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 2014), 283.57 Tilman Ruff, ‘Negotiating the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and the Role of ICAN’, Global Change, Peace & Security 30, no. 2 (2018), 233–41.58 Shinzo Hamai, ‘Peace Declaration’, 1952, <https://www.city.hiroshima.lg.jp/site/english/9672.html> [accessed 19 May 2023].59 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi, 242–3.60 ‘Hiroshima for Global Peace’ Plan Joint Project Executive Committee, 21.61 Ibid.62 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi, 247.63 Mizumoto, ‘Part II Questions for Hiroshima’, 35.64 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengosh, 247.65 Mizumoto, ‘Part II Questions for Hiroshima’, 35.66 Ibid.67 Yuta Shibayama, ‘A-Bomb Hibakusha Groups in 7 Japan Prefs May Disband or Suspend Activities: Survey’, Mainichi, 7 August 2020, <https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20200807/p2a/00m/0na/015000c> [accessed 19 May 2023].68 Shogi Oseto and Hitoshi Nagai, ‘Part III Exploring Hiroshima, Column 5 Listening to the Voices of A-Bomb Survivors’, in Hiroshima’s Path to Reconstruction, 52.69 Ibid.70 Mizumoto, ‘Part II Questions for Hiroshima’, 35.71 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi, 278.72 Ibid., 312.73 Akira Kawasaki, Kakuheiki Wa Nakuseru [Nuclear Weapons Can Be Abolished] (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 2018), 108.74 ‘Hiroshima for Global Peace’ Plan Joint Project Executive Committee, 12.75 Land Rezoning Division, 176.76 ‘Hiroshima for Global Peace’ Plan Joint Project Executive Committee, 12.77 Carola Hein, ‘Tange Kenzō’s Proposal for Rebuilding Hiroshima’, in Cartographic Japan, ed. by Kären Wigen, Fumiko Sugimoto, and Cary Karacas (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2016), 205.78 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi, 305; David Petersen and Mandy Conti, Survivors: The A-Bombed Trees of Hiroshima (Morrisville, NC: Lulu Press, 2008).79 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi, 306–7.80 Mizumoto, ‘Part II Questions for Hiroshima’, 59.81 Ibid., 36.82 Ibid.83 Ibid.84 Ibid.85 Allam Alkazei and Kosuke Matsubara, ‘The Role of Post-War Reconstruction Planning in Hiroshima’s Image-Shift to a Peace Memorial City’, Proceedings of the 18th International Planning History Society Conference, 2018, 378–99.86 Lisa Yoneyama, Hiroshima Traces: Time, Space, and the Dialectics of Memory (Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press, 1999).87 Ibid., 20.88 Robin Gerster, ‘Hiroshima No More: Forgetting “the Bomb”’, War & Society 22, no. 1 (2004), 64.89 Bruno Latour, We Have Never Been Modern (Harvard University Press, 1993; Bruno Latour, ‘Agency at the Time of the Anthropocene’, New Literary History 45, no. 1 (2014), 1–18.90 Timothy Morton, ‘From Things Flow What We Call Time’, in Spatial Experiments: Models for Space Defined by Movement, ed. by Olafur Eliasson et al. (Thames and Hudson, 2015) <https://www.academia.edu/30680145/From_Things_Flow_What_We_Call_Time> [accessed 16 January 2023].91 Karen Barad, ‘Troubling Time/s and Ecologies of Nothingness: Re-Turning, Re-Membering, and Facing the Incalculable’, New Formations 92, no. 92 (2017), 56–86.92 Erik Ropers, ‘Contested Spaces of Ethnicity: Zainichi Korean Accounts of the Atomic Bombings’, Critical Military Studies 1, no. 2 (2015), 145–59.93 Nicola Piper, ‘War and Memory: Victim Identity and the Struggle for Compensation in Japan’, War & Society 19, no. 1 (2001), 131–48.94 Akiko Naono, ‘The Origins of “Hibakusha” as a Scientific and Political Classification of the Survivor’, Japanese Studies 39, no. 3 (2019), 333–52.95 For a timeline of the medical care for survivors: Hiroshima for Global Peace, ‘Medical Care and support for A-bomb Survivors’, available at <https://hiroshimaforpeace.com/en/hiroshima75/mdeicalcare/> [ accessed 16 January 2023].96 Madeleine Fagan, ‘On the Dangers of an Anthropocene Epoch: Geological Time, Political Time and Post-Human Politics’, Political Geography 70 (2019), 55–63.97 Jack Amoureux and Varun Reddy, ‘Multiple Anthropocenes: Pluralizing Space–Time as a Response to “the Anthropocene”’, Globalizations 18, no. 6 (2021), 929–46.Additional informationNotes on contributorsDahlia SimanganDahlia Simangan is Associate Professor at the IDEC Institute of Hiroshima University and one of the core members of the university’s Network for Education and Research on Peace and Sustainability (NERPS). She holds a PhD in International, Political, and Strategic Studies from the Australian National University (2017). She is the author of International Peacebuilding and Local Involvement: A Liberal Renaissance (Routledge, 2019) and several research articles on post-conflict peacebuilding, the relationship between peace and sustainability, and international relations in the Anthropocene. She is an Assistant Editor of Peacebuilding and a member of the Planet Politics Institute. X: @dahlia_cs; Website: https://dahliasimangan.com/","PeriodicalId":43656,"journal":{"name":"War & Society","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"War & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07292473.2023.2273033","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

AbstractThis article revisits the case of Hiroshima’s post-war reconstruction using the lens of reflexive peacebuilding. Reflexive peacebuilding is a set of practices that align peacebuilding efforts with the notions of agency, time, and space, as problematised within the critical discourse on the Anthropocene. For this study, a review of relevant policies and initiatives following the bombing reveals how agencies, temporalities, and spatialities in Hiroshima’s post-war reconstruction generate interweaving and sometimes contesting peace narratives. Hiroshima’s experience in responding to the needs of the survivors, accommodating future generations, and using spaces for peace promotion offer insights into the blurred agency, uncertain times, and porous spaces of Anthropocene imaginaries.Keywords: Post-war reconstructionpeacebuildingreflexive peacebuildingAnthropoceneHiroshima AcknowledgementsI am grateful to the editorial team of War & Society and the anonymous reviewers for their comments on the earlier version of this paper. I also wish to acknowledge the research assistance of Kazuma Sugano for the selection and translation of relevant documents used in the analysis of this paper.Disclosure statementThe authors declare there is no conflict of interest in this study.Notes1 Colin N. Waters et al., ‘Can Nuclear Weapons Fallout Mark the Beginning of the Anthropocene Epoch?’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 71, no. 3 (2015), 46–57.2 John S. Dryzek and Jonathan Pickering, The Politics of the Anthropocene (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019).3 Dahlia Simangan, ‘Reflexive Peacebuilding: Lessons from the Anthropocene Discourse’, Global Society 35, no. 4 (2021), 479–500.4 UN, ‘An Agenda for Peace: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-Keeping’, 31 January 1992, para. 57, https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/145749?ln=en [accessed 19 May 1923].5 Several indigenous studies scholars have emphasised the experiences of societies and communities subjected to colonialism, slavery, and imperialism in dealing with the loss of life, land, and relationships. These experiences are exacerbated by global environmental change and left unaddressed by the power asymmetries underpinning the global politics of climate action: Heather Davis and Zoe Todd, ‘On the Importance of a Date, Or, Decolonizing the Anthropocene’, ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies 16, no. 4 (2017), 761–80; Audra Mitchell, ‘Beyond Biodiversity and Species: Problematizing Extinction’, Theory, Culture & Society 33, no. 5 (2016), 23–42; Kyle P. Whyte, ‘Indigenous Science (Fiction) for the Anthropocene: Ancestral Dystopias and Fantasies of Climate Change Crises’, Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space 1, no. 1–2 (2018), 224–42.6 Simon Dalby, ‘Framing the Anthropocene: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly’, The Anthropocene Review 3, no. 1 (2016), 33–51.7 The policy review conducted for this paper is limited to publicly available documents that summarise the policies and initiatives undertaken by Hiroshima’s prefectural government and Hiroshima City’s municipal government. Hiroshima for Global Peace (HGP) has published several volumes in English containing the historical background and comprehensive reviews of Hiroshima’s reconstruction. These policies and initiatives were categorised according to decades, from 1945 until 2020, with each decade containing the said policies and initiatives relevant to the research questions. Due to the Japanese language limitation of the author, this paper extensively draws on HGP’s relevant publications available at [accessed 19 May 2023]. A research assistant who is fluent in the Japanese language searched and translated other relevant scholarly articles and government documents that are written in Japanese.8 These questions do not aim to provide a comprehensive historical account of Hiroshima’s post-war reconstruction. It must be recognised that there is no single narrative or perspective to this part of Japan’s history. Differing and often competing ideologies and interests among national parties, labour unions, peace movements, politicians, and other interest groups have influenced the process of post-war reconstruction and peace promotion in Hiroshima and elsewhere in varying degrees.9 Paul J. Crutzen and Eugene F. Stoermer, ‘The Anthropocene’, International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme Newsletter, no. 41 (2000), 17–8.10 Dahlia Simangan, ‘Situating the Asia Pacific in the Age of the Anthropocene’, Australian Journal of International Affairs 73, no. 6 (2019), 564–84.11 Jason W. Moore, ed., Anthropocene or Capitalocene?: Nature, History, and the Crisis of Capitalism, 1st ed. (Oakland, CA: PM Press, 2016).12 Giovanna Di Chiro, ‘Welcome to the White (M)Anthropocene? A Feminist-Environmentalist Critique’, in Routledge Handbook of Gender and Environment, ed. by Sherilyn MacGregor (Oxon and New York: Routledge, 2017), 487–505; Nancy Tuana, ‘Climate Apartheid: The Forgetting of Race in the Anthropocene’, Critical Philosophy of Race 7, no. 1 (2019), 1–31.13 Jeremy Baskin, ‘Paradigm Dressed as Epoch: The Ideology of the Anthropocene’, Environmental Values 24, no. 1 (2015), 11.14 Several studies point to different transitions in geological history, marking the onset of the Anthropocene. For a review of these transitions: Simon L. Lewis and Mark A. Maslin, ‘Defining the Anthropocene’, Nature 519, no. 7542 (2015), 171–80.15 Halvard Buhaug, Nils Petter Gleditsch, and Ole Magnus Theisen, ‘Implications of Climate Change for Armed Conflict’, Social Dimensions of Climate Change Workshop (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2008); Ken Conca and Geoffrey D. Dabelko, eds, Environmental Peacemaking (Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 2002); Vally Koubi, ‘Climate Change and Conflict’, Annual Review of Political Science 22, no. 1 (2019), 343–60.16 Eva Lövbrand and Malin Mobjörk, eds, Anthropocene (In)Securities: Reflections on Collective Survival 50 Years After the Stockholm Conference (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021); Ignasi Torrent, ‘An Introduction to “Peace, Conflicts and Security in the Anthropocene: Ruptures and Limits”’, Revista de Estudios En Seguridad Internacional 7, no. 1 (2021), i–vi; Paul Heikkurinen, Sustainability and Peaceful Coexistence for the Anthropocene (Oxfordshire and New York: Routledge, 2017); Rhys Kelly, ‘Avoiding the “Anthropocene”?: An Assessment of the Extent and Nature of Engagement with Environmental Issues in Peace Research’, Peace and Conflict Studies 27, no. 3 (2021), article 3.17 Hans Günter Brauch, ‘Sustainable Peace in the Anthropocene: Towards Political Geoecology and Peace Ecology’, in Handbook on Sustainability Transition and Sustainable Peace, ed. by Hans Günter Brauch et al., Hexagon Series on Human and Environmental Security and Peace (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016), 187–236; Simon Dalby, ‘Peace in the Anthropocene’, Peace Review 25, no. 4 (2013), 561–67; Simangan, ‘Reflexive Peacebuilding’.18 Simangan, ‘Reflexive Peacebuilding’.19 Jack L. Amoureux and Brent J. Steele, Reflexivity and International Relations: Positionality, Critique, and Practice (Oxon: Routledge, 2016).20 Matthew Eagleton-Pierce, ‘Examining the Case for Reflexivity in International Relations: Insights from Bourdieu’, Journal of Critical Globalisation Studies 1, no. 1 (2009), 111–23.21 Inanna Hamati-Ataya, ‘Reflexivity and International Relations’, International Relations, 2020; Brooke Ackerly and Jacqui True, ‘Reflexivity in Practice: Power and Ethics in Feminist Research on International Relations’, International Studies Review 10, no. 4 (2008), 693–707; Cecelia Lynch, ‘Reflexivity in Research on Civil Society: Constructivist Perspectives’, International Studies Review 10, no. 4 (2008), 708–21.22 Dryzek and Pickering, 17.23 Ibid.24 Ibid.25 Simangan, ‘Reflexive Peacebuilding’.26 Ibid.27 David Chandler, Ontopolitics in the Anthropocene: An Introduction to Mapping, Sensing and Hacking (Oxon and New York: Routledge, 2017); David Chandler and Julian Reid, Becoming Indigenous: Governing Imaginaries in the Anthropocene (London: Rowman & Littlefield, 2019).28 Matt McDonald, Ecological Security: Climate Change and the Construction of Security (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021).29 Simangan, ‘Reflexive Peacebuilding’.30 Shahrbanou Tadjbakhsh, ed., Rethinking the Liberal Peace: External Models and Local Alternatives (Oxon: Routledge, 2011); Edward Newman, Roland Paris and Oliver P. Richmond, New Perspectives on Liberal Peacebuilding (Tokyo: United Nations University Press, 2009).31 Roger Mac Ginty and Oliver P. Richmond, ‘The Local Turn in Peace Building: A Critical Agenda for Peace’, Third World Quarterly 34, no. 5 (2013), 763–83.32 Oliver P. Richmond, ‘A Post-Liberal Peace: Eirenism and the Everyday’, Review of International Studies 35, no. 3 (2009), 557–80; Roger Mac Ginty, Everyday Peace: How So-Called Ordinary People Can Disrupt Violent Conflict, Studies in Strategic Peacebuilding (New York: Oxford University Press, 2021); Cedric de Coning, ‘Adaptive Peacebuilding’, International Affairs 94, no. 2 (2018), 301–17.33 Roger Mac Ginty, International Peacebuilding and Local Resistance: Hybrid Forms of Peace (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011); Oliver P. Richmond, A Post-Liberal Peace (London and New York: Routledge, 2011); Tadjbakhsh.34 Oliver P. Richmond, ‘Beyond Local Ownership in the Architecture of International Peacebuilding’, Ethnopolitics 11, no. 4 (2012), 354–75.35 Richmond, ‘A Post-Liberal Peace’, 566.36 Mac Ginty and Richmond, ‘The Local Turn in Peace Building’.37 Dahlia Simangan, International Peacebuilding and Local Involvement: A Liberal Renaissance? (Routledge, 2019).38 de Coning.39 Dryzek and Pickering, 105.40 Eileen Crist, ‘The Reaches of Freedom: A Response to An Ecomodernist Manifesto’, Environmental Humanities 7, no. 1 (2016), 245–54; Madeleine Fagan, ‘Security in the Anthropocene: Environment, Ecology, Escape’, European Journal of International Relations 23, no. 2 (2017), 292–314; Dipesh Chakrabarty, ‘Planetary Crises and the Difficulty of Being Modern’, Millennium 46, no. 3 (2018), 259–82.41 Edward Newman, ‘A Human Security Peace-Building Agenda’, Third World Quarterly 32, no. 10 (2011), 1737–56; Pamina Firchow, Reclaiming Everyday Peace: Local Voices in Measurement and Evaluation After War (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018).42 Simangan, ‘Reflexive Peacebuilding’, 490.43 Land Rezoning Division, Urban Development Department, Urban Development Bureau, the City of Hiroshima, and Editorial Society for the Records of Postwar Reconstruction Project, ed., Sensai Fukkoh Jigyoushi [The Records of Postwar Reconstruction Project] (Hiroshima: and Rezoning Division, Urban Development Department, Urban Development Bureau, the City of Hiroshima, 1995).44 ‘Hiroshima for Global Peace’ Plan Joint Project Executive Committee (Hiroshima Prefecture and The City of Hiroshima), Hiroshima’s Path to Reconstruction, 2nd edition (Hiroshima: ‘Hiroshima for Global Peace’ Plan Joint Project Executive Committee (Hiroshima Prefecture and The City of Hiroshima), 2020).45 S. Ubuki, ‘II Peace Movements’, in Learning from Hiroshima’s Reconstruction Experience: Reborn from the Ashes, ed. by ‘Hiroshima for Global Peace’ Plan Joint Project Executive Committee (Hiroshima Prefecture and The City of Hiroshima, 2014), 157.46 Ubuki, ‘II Peace Movements’.47 ‘Hiroshima for Global Peace’ Plan Joint Project Executive Committee.48 Ibid.49 K. Mizumoto, ‘Part II Questions for Hiroshima: FAQ on Reconstruction of Hiroshima’, in Hiroshima’s Path to Reconstruction, 25–38.50 Ibid., 31.51 Ibid.52 Noriyuki Kawano and Luli van der Does, ‘Heritage of the Atomic-Bomb Experience: What Needs to Be Conveyed?’ Hiroshima Peace Science 39 (2017), 69–93.53 Mizumoto, 34.54 Ibid.55 Ibid.56 Satoru Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi [Hiroshima’s Postwar History] (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 2014), 283.57 Tilman Ruff, ‘Negotiating the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons and the Role of ICAN’, Global Change, Peace & Security 30, no. 2 (2018), 233–41.58 Shinzo Hamai, ‘Peace Declaration’, 1952, [accessed 19 May 2023].59 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi, 242–3.60 ‘Hiroshima for Global Peace’ Plan Joint Project Executive Committee, 21.61 Ibid.62 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi, 247.63 Mizumoto, ‘Part II Questions for Hiroshima’, 35.64 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengosh, 247.65 Mizumoto, ‘Part II Questions for Hiroshima’, 35.66 Ibid.67 Yuta Shibayama, ‘A-Bomb Hibakusha Groups in 7 Japan Prefs May Disband or Suspend Activities: Survey’, Mainichi, 7 August 2020, [accessed 19 May 2023].68 Shogi Oseto and Hitoshi Nagai, ‘Part III Exploring Hiroshima, Column 5 Listening to the Voices of A-Bomb Survivors’, in Hiroshima’s Path to Reconstruction, 52.69 Ibid.70 Mizumoto, ‘Part II Questions for Hiroshima’, 35.71 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi, 278.72 Ibid., 312.73 Akira Kawasaki, Kakuheiki Wa Nakuseru [Nuclear Weapons Can Be Abolished] (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 2018), 108.74 ‘Hiroshima for Global Peace’ Plan Joint Project Executive Committee, 12.75 Land Rezoning Division, 176.76 ‘Hiroshima for Global Peace’ Plan Joint Project Executive Committee, 12.77 Carola Hein, ‘Tange Kenzō’s Proposal for Rebuilding Hiroshima’, in Cartographic Japan, ed. by Kären Wigen, Fumiko Sugimoto, and Cary Karacas (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2016), 205.78 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi, 305; David Petersen and Mandy Conti, Survivors: The A-Bombed Trees of Hiroshima (Morrisville, NC: Lulu Press, 2008).79 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi, 306–7.80 Mizumoto, ‘Part II Questions for Hiroshima’, 59.81 Ibid., 36.82 Ibid.83 Ibid.84 Ibid.85 Allam Alkazei and Kosuke Matsubara, ‘The Role of Post-War Reconstruction Planning in Hiroshima’s Image-Shift to a Peace Memorial City’, Proceedings of the 18th International Planning History Society Conference, 2018, 378–99.86 Lisa Yoneyama, Hiroshima Traces: Time, Space, and the Dialectics of Memory (Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press, 1999).87 Ibid., 20.88 Robin Gerster, ‘Hiroshima No More: Forgetting “the Bomb”’, War & Society 22, no. 1 (2004), 64.89 Bruno Latour, We Have Never Been Modern (Harvard University Press, 1993; Bruno Latour, ‘Agency at the Time of the Anthropocene’, New Literary History 45, no. 1 (2014), 1–18.90 Timothy Morton, ‘From Things Flow What We Call Time’, in Spatial Experiments: Models for Space Defined by Movement, ed. by Olafur Eliasson et al. (Thames and Hudson, 2015) [accessed 16 January 2023].91 Karen Barad, ‘Troubling Time/s and Ecologies of Nothingness: Re-Turning, Re-Membering, and Facing the Incalculable’, New Formations 92, no. 92 (2017), 56–86.92 Erik Ropers, ‘Contested Spaces of Ethnicity: Zainichi Korean Accounts of the Atomic Bombings’, Critical Military Studies 1, no. 2 (2015), 145–59.93 Nicola Piper, ‘War and Memory: Victim Identity and the Struggle for Compensation in Japan’, War & Society 19, no. 1 (2001), 131–48.94 Akiko Naono, ‘The Origins of “Hibakusha” as a Scientific and Political Classification of the Survivor’, Japanese Studies 39, no. 3 (2019), 333–52.95 For a timeline of the medical care for survivors: Hiroshima for Global Peace, ‘Medical Care and support for A-bomb Survivors’, available at [ accessed 16 January 2023].96 Madeleine Fagan, ‘On the Dangers of an Anthropocene Epoch: Geological Time, Political Time and Post-Human Politics’, Political Geography 70 (2019), 55–63.97 Jack Amoureux and Varun Reddy, ‘Multiple Anthropocenes: Pluralizing Space–Time as a Response to “the Anthropocene”’, Globalizations 18, no. 6 (2021), 929–46.Additional informationNotes on contributorsDahlia SimanganDahlia Simangan is Associate Professor at the IDEC Institute of Hiroshima University and one of the core members of the university’s Network for Education and Research on Peace and Sustainability (NERPS). She holds a PhD in International, Political, and Strategic Studies from the Australian National University (2017). She is the author of International Peacebuilding and Local Involvement: A Liberal Renaissance (Routledge, 2019) and several research articles on post-conflict peacebuilding, the relationship between peace and sustainability, and international relations in the Anthropocene. She is an Assistant Editor of Peacebuilding and a member of the Planet Politics Institute. X: @dahlia_cs; Website: https://dahliasimangan.com/
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
广岛战后重建的机构、时间和空间:人类世反思性建设和平的案例?
1 (2016), 245-54;玛德琳·费根,《人类世的安全:环境、生态、逃避》,《欧洲国际关系杂志》第23期,第2期。2 (2017), 292-314;迪佩什·查克拉巴蒂,《地球危机与现代的困难》,《千禧年》第46期,no。爱德华·纽曼:《人类安全与和平建设议程》,《第三世界季刊》,第32期,第82.41页。10 (2011), 1737-56;帕米娜·费彻,《恢复日常和平:战后测量与评估中的地方声音》(剑桥:剑桥大学出版社,2018年)Simangan,《反思性建设和平》,490.43广岛市城市发展局城市发展部土地重新规划处和战后重建项目记录编辑协会编,《战后重建项目记录》(广岛:和广岛城市发展局城市发展部重新规划处,1995年)。44“广岛促全球和平”计划联合项目执行委员会(广岛市和广岛市),《广岛的重建之路》,第二版(广岛:“广岛促全球和平”计划联合项目执行委员会(广岛市和广岛市),2020年)。45S. Ubuki,“第二和平运动”,《从广岛重建经验中学习:从灰烬中重生》,“广岛促进全球和平”计划联合项目执行委员会编辑(广岛市和广岛市,2014年),157.46 Ubuki,“第二和平运动”。47“广岛促进全球和平”计划联合项目执行委员会。48同上,49 K。Mizumoto,“第二部分对广岛的问题:关于广岛重建的常见问题”,《广岛的重建之路》,25-38.50同上,31.51同上。52 Noriyuki Kawano和Luli van der Does,“原子弹经验的遗产:需要传达什么?”[广岛和平科学39 (2017),69-93.53]Mizumoto, 34.54同上。55同上。56 Ubuki Satoru, Hiroshima Sengoshi[广岛的战后历史](东京:Iwanami Shoten, 2014), 283.57 Tilman Ruff,“联合国禁止核武器条约的谈判与ICAN的作用”,全球变化,和平与安全30,第3期。2(2018), 233-41.58滨井晋,“和平宣言”,1952年,[访问2023年5月19日].59Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi, 242-3.60“广岛为全球和平”计划联合项目执行委员会,21.61同上。62 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi, 247.63 Mizumoto,“第二部分关于广岛的问题”,35.64 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi, 247.65 Mizumoto,“第二部分关于广岛的问题”,35.66同上。67柴山裕太,“日本7个县的原子弹爆炸团体可能解散或暂停活动:调查”,每日新闻,2020年8月7日,[访问日期:2023年5月19日].68Shogi Oseto和永井仁,“第三部分探索广岛,第五栏倾听原子弹幸存者的声音”,在广岛的重建之路,52.69同上。70 Mizumoto,“第二部分对广岛的问题”,35.71 Ubuki, Hiroshima Sengoshi, 278.72同上,312.73川崎明,Kakuheiki Wa Nakuseru[核武器可以被废除](东京:Iwanami Shoten, 2018), 108.74“广岛争取全球和平”计划联合项目执行委员会,12.75土地区划部门,176.76“广岛争取全球和平”计划联合项目执行委员会,12.77 Carola Hein,“Tange kenzhi重建广岛的建议”,《日本制图》,Kären Wigen,杉本文子和Cary Karacas主编(芝加哥:芝加哥大学出版社,2016),205.78 Ubuki,广岛Sengoshi, 305;大卫·彼得森和曼迪·康蒂,《幸存者:广岛原子弹爆炸的树木》(北卡罗来纳州莫里斯维尔:露露出版社,2008),第79页Mizumoto,“第二部分关于广岛的问题”,59.81同上,36.82同上,83同上,84同上,85 Allam Alkazei和Kosuke Matsubara,“战后重建规划在广岛形象中的作用-向和平纪念城市的转变”,2018年第18届国际规划历史学会会议论文集,378-99.86 Lisa Yoneyama,广岛的痕迹:时间,空间和记忆的辩证法(洛杉矶,加利福尼亚州:加州大学出版社,1999).87罗宾·格斯特,《不再有广岛:忘记“原子弹”》,《战争与社会》第22期,第20.88页。布鲁诺·拉图尔:《我们从未是现代的》(哈佛大学出版社,1993);布鲁诺·拉图尔,《人类世时期的代理》,《新文学史》第45期,no。1 (2014), 1 - 18.90 Timothy Morton,“从我们称之为时间的事物流动”,《空间实验:由运动定义的空间模型》,由Olafur Eliasson等人主编(Thames and Hudson, 2015)[访问于2023年1月16日].91凯伦·巴拉德,“令人不安的时间和虚无的生态:回归、回忆和面对不可估量的”,《新形成》92期,第2期。Erik Ropers,“种族争议空间:在日朝鲜人对原子弹爆炸的描述”,《批判军事研究》第1期,第92(2017),56-86.92。2(2015), 145-59。 [93]尼古拉·派珀,《战争与记忆:日本受害者身份与赔偿之争》,《战争与社会》第19期。直野明子,“作为幸存者的科学和政治分类的“暴走”的起源”,《日本研究》第39期,2001年,第131-48.94页。3(2019), 333-52.95幸存者医疗护理时间表:广岛促进全球和平,"原子弹幸存者的医疗护理和支持",见[2023年1月16日查阅].96马德琳·费根:《论人类世时代的危险:地质时间、政治时间和后人类政治》,《政治地理》第70期(2019),55-63.97。6(2021), 929-46。作者简介:dahlia Simangan,广岛大学IDEC研究所副教授,广岛大学和平与可持续发展教育与研究网络(NERPS)核心成员之一。她于2017年获得澳大利亚国立大学国际、政治和战略研究博士学位。她是《国际建设和平与地方参与:自由主义复兴》(Routledge出版社,2019年)的作者,并发表了几篇关于冲突后建设和平、和平与可持续性之间的关系以及人类世国际关系的研究文章。她是《建设和平》杂志的助理编辑,也是地球政治研究所的成员。X: @dahlia_cs;网站:https://dahliasimangan.com/
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
War & Society
War & Society Multiple-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
25.00%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
Effectiveness of tocilizumab in hospitalized moderate-to-severe COVID-19 patients: a real-life study. Agencies, temporalities, and spatialities in Hiroshima’s post-war reconstruction: a case of reflexive peacebuilding in the Anthropocene? Anomalies in Collective Victimhood in Post-War Japan: ‘Hiroshima’ As a Victimisation Symbol for the Collective National Memory of War The Southern Irish Loyalists Relief Association and Irish Ex-Servicemen of the First World War, 1922–1932 Military welfare history: what is it and why should it be considered?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1