Abstract. Defining experiences of climate change loss and damage (L&D) is the topic of contentious debate across the social sciences and humanities. In this paper, we contribute to this debate by making loss(es) from climate change better legible. After detailing the complexity of the L&D debate from both a political and scientific perspective, we turn to phenomenological theory (Martin Heidegger, Tetsuro Watsuji, Bernhard Waldenfels) in order to make sense of climate's presence and the absences generated from changing climates. The phenomenology of loss we develop promises to help account for experiences of climate change that escape more traditional (social) scientific approaches to both economic and non-economic losses. More broadly, we present an alternative approach to applying phenomenology to research in social science (on climate change).
摘要定义气候变化损失和损害(L&D)的经验是社会科学和人文科学中有争议的话题。在本文中，我们通过使气候变化造成的损失更清晰地显示出来，从而为这场辩论做出贡献。在从政治和科学的角度详细介绍了L&D辩论的复杂性之后，我们转向现象学理论(Martin Heidegger, Tetsuro Watsuji, Bernhard Waldenfels)，以便理解气候变化带来的气候存在和缺失。我们开发的损失现象学有望帮助解释气候变化的经验，这些经验无法通过更传统的(社会)科学方法来解决经济和非经济损失。更广泛地说，我们提出了一种将现象学应用于社会科学(关于气候变化)研究的替代方法。
{"title":"What is lost from climate change? Phenomenology at the “limits to adaptation”","authors":"M. G. Hepach, Friederike Hartz","doi":"10.5194/gh-78-211-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-78-211-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Defining experiences of climate change loss and damage (L&D) is the topic of contentious debate across the social sciences and humanities. In this paper, we contribute to this debate by making loss(es) from climate change better legible. After detailing the complexity of the L&D debate from both a political and scientific perspective, we turn to phenomenological theory (Martin Heidegger, Tetsuro Watsuji, Bernhard Waldenfels) in order to make sense of climate's presence and the absences generated from changing climates. The phenomenology of loss we develop promises to help account for experiences of climate change that escape more traditional (social) scientific approaches to both economic and non-economic losses. More broadly, we present an alternative approach to applying phenomenology to research in social science (on climate change).\u0000","PeriodicalId":35649,"journal":{"name":"Geographica Helvetica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41650668","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract. The British geographer Halford J. Mackinder developed two different concepts of a dystopian new global order. The first, developed in 1904 and known as the pivot area concept, was adopted by German geopolitician Karl Haushofer in the 1920s. The second, developed in 1919, was named the heartland theory and was adopted in Great Britain and the USA. Haushofer reversed the dystopian vision of the pivot area concept into a utopian concept for German world power. Due to Haushofer's adaptation, interest in Mackinder's theories rose in the USA in the 1940s. Within the process of adaptation in the USA, both concepts were intertwined, resulting in the perception of the two as a monolithic bloc. Through this multi-layered process of intercontinental reception and adaptation in Germany and the USA, the term “heartland” became a generic spatial denomination detached from the geographical region it originally prescribed, integrable with various geopolitical concepts as the centre of an imagined world order. The reduction of complexity of the theory through the translation of text into maps led to its popularization among the US public during the 1940s and 1950s. Mackinder himself laid out the flexibility of the theory's interpretive possibilities by reflexively revising the theory and adapting it to the history of events over the course of the first half of the 20th century itself. In consequence, the generic spatial denomination “heartland” and the associated adopted theory served as a geopolitical argument for the strategic narrative legitimizing US foreign policy in World War II and during the Cold War.
{"title":"Mackinder's “heartland” – legitimation of US foreign policy in World War II and the Cold War of the 1950s","authors":"O. Krause","doi":"10.5194/gh-78-183-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-78-183-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The British geographer Halford J. Mackinder developed two different concepts of a dystopian new global order. The first, developed in 1904 and known as the pivot area concept, was adopted by German geopolitician Karl Haushofer in the 1920s. The second, developed in 1919, was named the heartland theory and was adopted in Great Britain and the USA. Haushofer reversed the dystopian vision of the pivot area concept into a utopian concept for German world power. Due to Haushofer's adaptation, interest in Mackinder's theories rose in the USA in the 1940s. Within the process of adaptation in the USA, both concepts were intertwined, resulting in the perception of the two as a monolithic bloc. Through this multi-layered process of intercontinental reception and adaptation in Germany and the USA, the term “heartland” became a generic spatial denomination detached from the geographical region it originally prescribed, integrable with various geopolitical concepts as the centre of an imagined world order. The reduction of complexity of the theory through the translation of text into maps led to its popularization among the US public during the 1940s and 1950s. Mackinder himself laid out the flexibility of the theory's interpretive possibilities by reflexively revising the theory and adapting it to the history of events over the course of the first half of the 20th century itself. In consequence, the generic spatial denomination\u0000“heartland” and the associated adopted theory served as a geopolitical\u0000argument for the strategic narrative legitimizing US foreign policy in\u0000World War II and during the Cold War.\u0000","PeriodicalId":35649,"journal":{"name":"Geographica Helvetica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43287782","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract. The long triumph of constructivism, particularly visible works such as Kuhn's writing on the structure of scientific revolutions, and many other scientific studies have made one thing clear: Reason alone does not decide on scientific topics, theories, and methods. Instead, very different factors, often considered illegitimate, help determine the course of science. These findings make scientific enlightenment gestures recurrently appear as sheer mockery, undermine the validity claims of scientific statements, open up possibilities for a strong politicisation of science and block any retrograde way out. Those who are nevertheless convinced of the importance of scientific autonomy, who defend a special validity of scientific knowledge and who accept the scientific duty of responsiveness, should acknowledge the decision-making challenges in science and, as the article recommends, engage in theory-theoretical dialogues.
{"title":"Wissenschaftliche Episteme und Geltung. Von der Konstruktion zum Dialog","authors":"P. Goeke","doi":"10.5194/gh-78-169-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-78-169-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The long triumph of constructivism, particularly visible works such as\u0000Kuhn's writing on the structure of scientific revolutions, and many other\u0000scientific studies have made one thing clear: Reason alone does not decide\u0000on scientific topics, theories, and methods. Instead, very different\u0000factors, often considered illegitimate, help determine the course of\u0000science. These findings make scientific enlightenment gestures recurrently\u0000appear as sheer mockery, undermine the validity claims of scientific\u0000statements, open up possibilities for a strong politicisation of science and\u0000block any retrograde way out. Those who are nevertheless convinced of the\u0000importance of scientific autonomy, who defend a special validity of\u0000scientific knowledge and who accept the scientific duty of responsiveness,\u0000should acknowledge the decision-making challenges in science and, as the\u0000article recommends, engage in theory-theoretical dialogues.\u0000","PeriodicalId":35649,"journal":{"name":"Geographica Helvetica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43493449","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract. The reception of Ratzel at the turn of the 20th century coincides with the rise of an academic geography supported by the republican regime and the internationally leading reputation of German geography. But, since the defeat of 1870, French science was driven by the “German challenge”, and the promotion of the social sciences fuelled competition between specialists. Ratzel's reception is characterised by its size, the notoriety of the reviewers and the variety of disciplines concerned. Analysis of the uses and especially of the modes of translation and disciplinary labelling reveals both the ambivalences of the criticism against Ratzel and the contrasting strategies mobilized, according to whether it is a question of founding a modern geography, writing a national geography, or imposing sociology as the master science. Positions then radicalise, accentuating criticism of a science in tune with the Reich's politics and culminating in wartime with the resemantization of the notion of Raum.
{"title":"Friedrich Ratzel, géographie et sciences sociales en France (1890–1918) – Centralité et distanciations","authors":"Marie-Claire Robic","doi":"10.5194/gh-78-157-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-78-157-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The reception of Ratzel at the turn of the 20th century\u0000coincides with the rise of an academic geography supported by the republican\u0000regime and the internationally leading reputation of German geography. But,\u0000since the defeat of 1870, French science was driven by the “German\u0000challenge”, and the promotion of the social sciences fuelled competition\u0000between specialists. Ratzel's reception is characterised by its size, the\u0000notoriety of the reviewers and the variety of disciplines concerned.\u0000Analysis of the uses and especially of the modes of translation and\u0000disciplinary labelling reveals both the ambivalences of the criticism\u0000against Ratzel and the contrasting strategies mobilized, according to\u0000whether it is a question of founding a modern geography, writing a national\u0000geography, or imposing sociology as the master science. Positions then\u0000radicalise, accentuating criticism of a science in tune with the Reich's\u0000politics and culminating in wartime with the resemantization of the notion\u0000of Raum.\u0000","PeriodicalId":35649,"journal":{"name":"Geographica Helvetica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45121096","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract. The study of places of memory is an expanding field in international geography, in which the concept of cultural memory by Aleida and Jan Assmann, which has its origins in German-language cultural studies, has received little attention. However, in a concentration of the concept on the specific concerns of a cultural-geographical study of places of memory lies the possibility – especially as an important intellectual style of German Theory – to explicitly ask about the mechanisms of origin and function of places of memory. The basic assumption of the concept is that cultural memory functions as a medial storehouse of experiences from the past. Based on the assumption that places of memory cannot be a storage, but only an anchor of memories, the article develops a space-oriented conception of cultural memory spaces derived from the basic features of cultural memory. The following four characteristics are elaborated: Cultural memory spaces are (1) dynamic and (2) present-related (3) supports of memory, (4) in which individual memories intertwine with cultural memory.
{"title":"Was sind kulturelle Gedächtnisräume? – Erinnern, Raum und das kulturelle Gedächtnis nach Aleida und Jan Assmann","authors":"E. Hubner","doi":"10.5194/gh-78-143-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-78-143-2023","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The study of places of memory is an expanding field in international geography, in which the concept of cultural memory by Aleida and Jan Assmann, which has its origins in German-language cultural studies,\u0000has received little attention. However, in a concentration of the concept on the specific concerns of a cultural-geographical study of places of memory lies the possibility – especially as an important intellectual style of German Theory – to explicitly ask about the mechanisms of origin and function of places of memory. The basic assumption of the concept is that cultural memory functions as a medial storehouse of experiences from the past. Based on the assumption that places of memory cannot be a storage, but only an anchor of memories, the article develops a space-oriented conception of cultural memory spaces derived from\u0000the basic features of cultural memory. The following four characteristics\u0000are elaborated: Cultural memory spaces are (1) dynamic and (2) present-related (3) supports of memory, (4) in which individual memories intertwine with cultural memory.\u0000","PeriodicalId":35649,"journal":{"name":"Geographica Helvetica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44394156","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Book review: Von Ein- und Ausschlüssen in Europa. Eine ethnographische Studie zu EU-Migration und Wohnungslosigkeit in Deutschland","authors":"Nadine Marquardt","doi":"10.5194/gh-78-135-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-78-135-2023","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p>\u0000 </jats:p>","PeriodicalId":35649,"journal":{"name":"Geographica Helvetica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43215538","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Book review: Anfänge. Eine neue Geschichte der Menschheit (The Dawn of Everything. A new History of Humanity)","authors":"Philipp Sarasin","doi":"10.5194/gh-78-131-2023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-78-131-2023","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p>\u0000 </jats:p>","PeriodicalId":35649,"journal":{"name":"Geographica Helvetica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43465225","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：