A colleague of mine in
geography at Syracuse University,
Farhana Sultana, has organized a mini-conference on the
Right to Water. It runs all day today and tomorrow (March 29th and 30th). The schedule is packed with interesting sessions, speakers, and time for feedback and dialogue; too many conferences, so little time (and money) on sabbatical (?). But it's encouraging to see more geographers entering, or committed to, the fray on water issues. Indirectly,
Aquadoc highlighted another geo-moment from the National Academy of Sciences on the future of the geographic sciences -- typically laden and leaden with technohype and praise for GIS. I understand this, even if my head aches with the internal mantra of "the solutions are not technical." And I say this as someone who teaches from this perspective of environmental geography and GIS (it's what I teach!), so I feel free to critique my own tribe.
Another fellow hydroblogger, David
Zetland, has been sounding off on this idea of a "right to water" and whether this helps or hurts in producing sound water policy - he thinks it doesn't help. You can see his last post on this issue (one of ten1)
here. I'm more ambivalent about this idea, since they are largely symbolic-political gestures at most levels. But no single economic framework has the entire solution, whether based in radical political economy or in more traditional neo-classical garb.
Next time: a critical and sympathetic review of Mark Carey's new book on melting glaciers in the (Peruvian) Andes.
A colleague of mine in geography at Syracuse University, Farhana Sultana, has organized a mini-conference on the Right to Water. It runs all day today and tomorrow (March 29th and 30th). The schedule is packed with interesting sessions, speakers, and time for feedback and dialogue; too many conferences, so little time (and money) on sabbatical (?). But it's encouraging to see more geographers entering, or committed to, the fray on water issues. Indirectly, Aquadoc highlighted another geo-moment from the National Academy of Sciences on the future of the geographic sciences -- typically laden and leaden with technohype and praise for GIS. I understand this, even if my head aches with the internal mantra of "the solutions are not technical." And I say this as someone who teaches from this perspective of environmental geography and GIS (it's what I teach!), so I feel free to critique my own tribe.
Comments