Abstract
Feminist political ecology (FPE) emerged as a theoretical field encompassing anthropology, geography, environmental and development studies in 1996 with the milestone publication of an edited collection of chapters by Dianne Rocheleau, Barbara Thomas-Slayter and Esther Wangari (1996). This theoretical body of knowledge uses gender to analyze societal –nature interactions, agency and power dynamics shaping knowledge and politics in relation to the environment.
When approaching this second edited volume, the natural expectation of a specialized reader is that it builds on the previous and existing work within the field. In this sense, this work does not disappoint. This book is the result of long dialogue among the authors, who are often not only scholars, but activists who are committed to embracing feminist political ecology in their daily lives as teachers, women and researchers. Accordingly, the book is addressed to a knowledgeable crowd of specialists that are already familiar with the field of FPE as it aims to bring the discussion theoretically forward by engaging with different spheres within the academies (e.g., teaching, activism and field research) at different scales (e.g., global, local, the body, the household and glocal) in an array of locations, and dealing with diverse issues (e.g., climate change, green economy, feminist economics and embodiment). The common denominator in all these contributions is an in-depth reflexive approach to the researchers’ positionality and on its limiting and troubling effects on scholarly research and activist engagement. While at times self-celebratory, this collection of chapters provides a well- grounded overview of the origins of FPE, of the limits of its application and of its frontier. Significant is the testimony of Dianne Rochealeau, the founder of FPE thinking, who when presenting at American Geographers’ Association meeting in 1996 was challenged by two African women in the audience: ‘This is our life. We know all this. And now we have to reference her every time we write about it?’ (p. 52).
Eminent scholars have contributed to this volume that is divided into three sections: first, ‘Positioning Feminist Political Ecology’, second, ‘Rethinking Feminist Political Ecology’ and, third, ‘Living Feminist Political Ecology’. Overall, the case studies, theoretical pieces and two final trialogues among researchers elucidate the ‘praxis of doing FPE to guide (our) collective action and collaboration’ (p. 9) towards environmental justice.
The first section of the book does not provide an in-depth understanding of FPE for those who are not familiar with it. However, what it does show is how this scientific approach can contribute to contesting current neoliberal tendencies towards women’s and indigenous people’s mistreatment by deploying concepts that are in vogue, such as the green economy and buen vivir (the Andean worldview that has its root in living in harmony with nature). On this, the reader should be aware that the subtitles in the book can be misleading, as the only chapter truly engaging with the ‘green economy’ is chapter two. Wichterich in this chapter poignantly shows how FPE and feminist political economy can find theoretical reciprocal strength given their common intersectional and contextualized analysis of gender of global and local power structures in order to critically assess and explore the externalization of care and subsistence work following the 2008 economic crisis. This chapter, together with chapter three—which looks at the appropriation of the Andean indigenous worldview of buen vivir—and chapter five—which deals with water privatization and its consequences on women’s livelihoods—challenge current neoliberal practices.
The second section of the book presents three case studies. While in chapter six, Nightingale refers to FPE only in passing when analyzing resilience policies at different scale, chapter four and five can be helpful to students who are just approaching FPE to understand its aims and theoretical framework through a solid ethnographic anchoring.
The book concludes with an inspiring and refreshing set of four chapters that show how FPE can become a daily praxis for those scholars engaging with it through activism. A particular praise goes to the last two chapters, which through the innovative dialogue format provide much food for thought in line with the overall aim of the book to decolonize thinking and ‘create a network of learners rather than a single focus on women or gender’ (p. 57) within FPE.
Finally, this rich edited collection certainly brings FPE forward by building on the existing literature, challenging current academic and economic trends and showing where FPE is going: FPE’s theoretical engagement with embodiment, affect, emotions and queer theory represents a deep epistemological analysis of social power and justice connected to cultures, ecologies and economies. While not suitable for students who are approaching FPE for the first time, this book provides thought for an experienced academic audience within social science that is familiar with feminist epistemological concerns and that is eager for some fresh thinking on how to push the boundaries and to enrich the relation between academic and activist practices.