Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Climate Technology, Gender, and Justice pp 145–155Cite as

Conclusion

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 370 Accesses

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Sociology ((BRIEFSSOCY))

Abstract

This final Chapter, summarizes some of the book’s most significant findings and undertakes a discussion of feminist standpoint theory and technofeminism. It make the case that certain insights from each can act as a supplement to FCE, which tends to fall short on the critical subjects of gender and power, discourse, and design. Incorporating an account of how climate engineering can be studied from these perspective adds an element of interdisciplinarity to FCE which, in accordance with its virtues of novelty and heterogeneity, should be encouraged.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Anderson, E. (1995a). Feminist epistemology: An interpretation and a defense. Hypatia, 10(3), 50–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, E. (1995b). Knowledge, human interests, and objectivity in feminist epistemology. Philosophical Topics, 23(2), 27–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardzell, S., & Churchill, E. F. (2011). IwC special issue “Feminism and HCI: New perspectives” Special Issue Editors’ introduction. Interacting with Computers, 23(5), iii–ixi.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bee, B. A., et al. (2015). A feminist approach to climate change governance: Everyday and intimate politics. Geography Compass, 9(6), 339–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, H. P. (2011). Gender, climate change and REDD+ in the Congo Basin forests of Central Africa. International Forestry Review, 13(2), 163–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckler, S. (2010). Normative theory. In D. Marsh & G. Stoker (Eds.), Theory and methods in political science (pp. 156–180). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cockburn, C. (1992). The circuit of technology: Gender, identity and power. In E. Hirsch & R. Silverston (Eds.), Consuming technologies: Media and information in domestic spaces (pp. 33–42). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellul, J. (1964). The technological society. New York: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaard, G. (2011). Ecofeminism revisited: Rejecting essentialism and re-placing species in a material feminist environmentalism. Feminist Formations, 23(2), 26–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goreau, T., et al. (2014). Geotherapy: Innovative methods of soil fertility restoration, carbon sequestration, and reversing CO 2 increase. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haack, S. (1996). Science as social?-yes and no. In J. Nelson (Ed.), Feminism, science, and the philosophy of science (pp. 79–93). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Haack, S. (2009). Evidence and inquiry: A pragmatist reconstruction of epistemology. Amherst/New York: Prometheus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, D. (1990). A manifesto for cyborgs: Science, technology, and socialist feminism in the 1980s. In L. Nicholson (Ed.), Feminism/postmodernism (pp. 190–233). New York: Routledge pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, D. J. (1994). A game of cat’s cradle: Science studies, feminist theory, cultural studies. Configurations, 2(1), 59–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, D. (2013). Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (1986a). The science question in feminism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (1986b). The instability of the analytical categories of feminist theory. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 11(4), 645–664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (1989). Feminist justificatory strategies. In Women, knowledge and reality (pp. 189–201). Boston: Unwin Hyman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (1992). Rethinking standpoint epistemology: What is“ strong objectivity?”. The Centennial Review, 36(3), 437–470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (1995). “Strong objectivity”: A response to the new objectivity question. Synthese, 104(3), 331–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (2004a). A socially relevant philosophy of science? Resources from standpoint theory’s controversiality. Hypatia, 19, 25–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. G. (2004b). The feminist standpoint theory reader: Intellectual and political controversies. Hove: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (2008). Sciences from below: Feminisms, postcolonalities, and modernities. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harding, S. (2015). Objectivity and diversity: Another logic of scientific research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hartsock, N. C. (1998). The feminist standpoint revisited and other essays. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartsock, N. (2004). The feminist standpoint: Developing the ground for a specifically feminist historical materialism. In S. Harding (Ed.), The feminist standpoint theory reader. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkesworth, M. (2006). Grappling with claims of truth. In M. Hawkesworth (Ed.), Innovation, feminist inquiry: From political conviction to methodological innovation. London: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hekman, S. (1999). Identity crises: Identity, identity politics, and beyond. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 2(1), 3–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hekman, S. J. (2013). Gender and knowledge: Elements of a postmodern feminism. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Intemann, K. (2010). 25 years of feminist empiricism and standpoint theory: Where are we now? Hypatia, 25(4), 778–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaijser, A., & Kronsell, A. (2014). Climate change through the lens of intersectionality. Environmental Politics, 23(3), 417–433. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09644016.2013.835203. Accessed 6 Mar 2017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kofinas, G. (2002). Community contributions to ecological monitoring: Knowledge co-production in the U.S.-Canada Arctic borderlands. In I. Krupnik & D. Jolly (Eds.), The Earth is faster now: Indigenous observations of Arctic environmental change (pp. 54–91). Fairbanks: Arctic Research Consortium of the United States.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levisohn, J. A. (2001). Inclusion and objectivity: Helen Longino’s feminist theory of scientific inquiry. Philosophy of Education Archive, 337–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longino, H. E. (1990). Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lykke, N. (2009). Non-innocent intersections of feminism and environmentalism. Women. Gender and Research, 18(3–4), 36–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moller, H. F., et al. (2004). Combining science and traditional ecological knowledge: Monitoring populations for co-management. Ecology and Society, 9, 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neis, B., & Williams, S. (1997). The new right, gender and the fisheries crisis: Local and global dimensions. Atlantis: Critical Studies in Gender, Culture & Social Justice, 21, 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, R. P., & Hirsch, E. (2000). Commercialisation of non-timber forest products: Review and analysis of research. Bogor: CIFOR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinnick, C., et al. (Eds.). (2003). Scrutinizing feminist epistemology: An examination of gender in science. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Postman, N. (1993). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seager, J. (2009). Death by degrees: Taking a feminist hard look at the 2 climate policy. Kvinder, Køn & Forskning, 3(4), 11–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, M. (2012). The web of valief: An assessment of feminist radical empiricism. In Crasnow et al. (Eds.), Out of the shadows: Analytic feminist contributions to traditional philosophy (pp. 435–451). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tuana, N. (2013). Gendering climate knowledge for justice: Catalyzing a new research agenda. In M. Alston & K. Whittenbury (Eds.), Research, action and policy: Addressing the gendered impacts of climate change (pp. 17–31). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wajcman, J. (2000). Reflections on gender and technology studies: In what state is the art? Social studies of science, 30(3), 447–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wajcman, J. (2002). Addressing technological change: The challenge to social theory. Current Sociology, 50(3), 347–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wajcman, J. (2006). Technocapitalism meets technofeminism: Women and technology in a wireless world. Labour & industry: A journal of the social and economic relations of work, 16(3), 7–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wajcman, J. (2007). From women and technology to gendered technoscience. Information, Community and Society, 10(3), 287–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winner, L. (1977). Autonomous technology: Technics-out-of-control as a theme in political thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Media and Cultural Studies, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

    Tina Sikka

Authors
  1. Tina Sikka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sikka, T. (2019). Conclusion. In: Climate Technology, Gender, and Justice. SpringerBriefs in Sociology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01147-5_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01147-5_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-01146-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-01147-5

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation