A feminist posthumanist ecopedagogy in/for/with animalScapes

References

• Adams, C., & Gruen, L. (2014). Prologue: Intersectional commitments. In C. J. Adams & L. Gruen (Eds.), Ecofeminism: Feminist intersections with other animals & the earth (pp. 1–36). New York, NY: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities. New York, NY: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Andrzejewski, J., Pedersen, H., & Wicklund, F. (2009). Interspecies education for humans, animals, and the earth. In J. Andrzejewski, M. P. Baltodano, & L. Symcox (Eds.), Social Justice, Peace, and Environmental Education. (pp. 136–154). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Appadurai, A. (1990). Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy. Theory, Culture, & Society, 7, 295–310. doi:10.1177/026327690007002017
   Google Scholar
• Bell, A. C., & Russell, C. (2000). Beyond human, beyond words: Anthropocentrism, critical pedagogy, and the poststructuralist turn. Canadian Journal of Education, 25(3), 188–203. doi:10.2307/1585953
   Google Scholar
• Biersack, A. (2006). Reimagining political ecology: Culture/power/history/nature. In A. Biersack & J. B. Greenberg (Eds.). Reimagining political ecology. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of ‘sex.” London, England: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Carastathis, A. (2014). The concept of intersectionality in feminist theory. Philosophy Compass, 9(5), 303–314. doi:10.1111/phc3.12129
   Google Scholar
• Collins, P. H. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Corman, L. (2011). Impossible subjects: The figure of the animal in Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 16, 29–45.
   Google Scholar
• Corman, L., & Vandrovcová, T. (2014). Radical humility: Toward a more holistic critical animal studies pedagogy. In A. Nocella II, J. Sorenson, K. Socha, & A. Matsuoka (Eds.)., Defining critical animal studies: An introduction to an intersectional social justice approach to animal liberation (pp. 135–157). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Crenshaw, K. W. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1(8), 139–167.
   Google Scholar
• Crenshaw, K. W. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299. doi:10.2307/1229039
   Google Scholar
• Deckha, M. (2006). The salience of species difference for feminist theory. Hastings Women's Law Review, 17(1), 1–38, article 2.
   Google Scholar
• Deckha, M. (2008). Disturbing images: PETA and the feminist ethics of animal advocacy. Ethics & the Environment, 13(2), 35–76. doi:10.2979/ETE.2008.13.2.35
   Google Scholar
• Deckha, M. (2010). The subhuman as an agent of violence. Journal of Critical Animal Studies, 8(3), 28–51.
   Google Scholar
• Deckha, M. (2012). Toward a postcolonial, posthumanist feminist theory: Centralizing race and culture in feminist work on nonhuman animals. Hypatia, 27(3), 527–545. doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.2012.01290.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deckha, M. (2013). Animal advocacy, feminism, and intersectionality. Deportate, Esuli, Profughe, 23, 48–65.
   Google Scholar
• Donovan, J. (2006). Feminism and the treatment of animals: From care to dialogue. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 31(2), 305–329. doi:10.1086/491750
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fien, J. (1993). Education for the environment: Critical curriculum theorising and environmental education. Geelong, Victoria, Australia: Deakin University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Food Empowerment Project. (2017). Factory farm workers. Retrieved from http://www.foodispower.org/factory-farm-workers/.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (1971). The archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on language. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
   Google Scholar
• Forsyth, T. (2004). Critical political ecology: The politics of environmental science. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gillespie, K., & Collard, R-C. (2015). Doing critical animal geographies: Future directions. In K. Gillespie & R. Collard (Eds.), Critical animal geographies: Politics, intersections, and hierarchies in a multispecies world (pp. 259–268). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gough, A. G., & Robottom, I. (1993). Towards a socially critical environmental education: Water quality studies in a coastal school. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 25(4), 301–316. doi:10.1080/0022027930250401
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gough, A. G. (2013). Researching differently: Generating a gender agenda for research in environmental education. In R. Stevenson, M. Brody, J. Dillon, & A. Wals (Eds.), International handbook of research on environmental education (pp. 375–393). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gough, N. (2016). Post-paradigmatic materialisms: A “new movement of thought” for outdoor environmental education research? Journal of Outdoor Environmental Education, 19(2), 51–65.
   Google Scholar
• Guthman, J. (2007). The Polanyian way? Voluntary labels as neoliberal governance. Antipode, 39(3), 456–478. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8330.2007.00535.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guthman, J. (2008). Bringing good food to others: Investigating the subjects of alternative food practice. Cultural Geographies, 15(4), 431–447. doi:10.1177/1474474008094315
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hancock, A. (2016). Intersectionality: An intellectual history. New York, NY: Oxford.
   Google Scholar
• Harper, A. B. (2010). Race as a “feeble matter” in veganism: Interrogating whiteness, geopolitical privilege, and consumption philosophy of cruelty-free products. Journal of Critical Animal Studies, 8(3), 5–27.
   Google Scholar
• Hovorka, A. J. (2012). Women/chickens vs. men/cattle: Insights on gender-species intersectionality. Geoforum, 23, 875–884. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2012.02.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hovorka, A. J. (2015). The Gender, Place, and Culture Jan Monk Distinguished Annual Lecture: Feminism and animals: Exploring interspecies relations through intersectionality, performativity, and standpoint. Gender, Place and Culture, 22(1), 1–19. doi:10.1080/0966369X.2014.993546
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hovorka, A. J. (2016). Animal geographies I: Globalizing and decolonizing. Progress in Human Geography, 41(3), 382–394. doi: 10.1177/0309132516646291
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joy, M. (2010). Why we love dogs, eat pigs, and wear cows. San Francisco, CA: Conari Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kahn, R. (2008). Towards ecopedagogy: Weaving a broad-based pedagogy of the liberation for animals, nature and the oppressed peoples of the Earth. In A. Darder, M. Baltodano, & R. Torres (Eds.), The critical pedagogy reader (2nd ed., pp. 522–540). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kahn, R. (2010). Critical pedagogy, ecoliteracy, & planetary crisis: The ecopedagogy movement. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, C. J. (2014). The wonderful horrible life of Michael Vick. In C. J. Adams & L. Gruen (Eds.), Ecofeminism: Feminist intersections with other animals & the earth (pp. 175–190). New York, NY: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Kirby, V., & Wilson, E. A. (2011). Feminist conversations with Vicki Kirby and Elizabeth A. Wilson. Feminist Theory, 12(2), 227–234. doi:10.1177/1464700111404289
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2010). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239–260. doi:10.1080/13504620220145401
   Google Scholar
• Lloro-Bidart, T. (2014). They call them ‘good-luck polka dots’: Disciplining bodies, bird biopower, and human-animal relationships at the Aquarium of the Pacific. Journal of Political Ecology, 21, 389–407.
   Google Scholar
• Lloro-Bidart, T. (2015a). A political ecology of education in/for the Anthropocene. Environment and Society: Advances in Research, 6, 128–148. doi:10.3167/ares.2015.060108
   Google Scholar
• Lloro-Bidart, T. (2015b). “Culture as ability”: Organizing enabling educative spaces for humans and animals. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 20, 93–108.
   Google Scholar
• Lloro-Bidart, T. (2017a). A feminist posthumanist political ecology of education for theorizing human-animal relations/relationships. Environmental Education Research, 23(1), 111–130. doi:10.1080/13504622.2015.1135419
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lloro-Bidart, T. (2017b). Neoliberal and disciplinary environmentality and ‘sustainable seafood’ consumption: Storying environmentally responsible action. Environmental Education Research, 23(8), 1182–1199. doi:10.1080/13504622.2015.1105198
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lloro-Bidart, T. (2017c). When ‘Angelino’ squirrels don't eat nuts: A feminist posthumanist politics of consumption across southern California. Gender, Place, & Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography, 24(6), 774–793. doi:10.1080/0966369X.2017.1314949
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lloro-Bidart, T. (2018). A feminist posthumanist multispecies ethnography for educational studies. Educational Studies. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/00131946.2017.1413370.
   Google Scholar
• Lloro-Bidart, T. (2018, in progress). Intersectional and interdisciplinary approaches to interspecies food justice pedagogies. In T. Lloro-Bidart & V. Banschbach (Eds.), Animals in environmental education: Interdisciplinary approaches to curriculum and pedagogy. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Lloro-Bidart, T., & Finewood, M. (2018). Looking outward and inward: What feminist theory offers the environmental studies and sciences. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences. Advance online publication. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13412-018-0468-7.
   Google Scholar
• Lloro-Bidart, T., & Russell, C. (2017). Learning science in aquariums and on whalewatching boats: The political deployment of other animals. In M. P. Mueller, D. J. Tippins, & A. J. Stewart (Eds.), Animals in science education: Ethics, curriculum, and pedagogy (pp. 41–50). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Lloro-Bidart, T., & Semenko, K. (2017). Toward a feminist ethic of self-care for environmental educators. Journal of Environmental Education, 48(1), 18–25. doi:10.1080/00958964.2016.1249324
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longhurst, R. (2005). Situating bodies. In L. Nelson & J. Seager (Eds.), A companion to feminist geography (pp. 337–349). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• MacPherson, S. (2011). What Tashi taught me: “Petagogy” and the education of emotions. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 16, 76–92.
   Google Scholar
• Meek, D., & Lloro-Bidart, T. (2017). Introduction to the political ecology of education. Journal of Environmental Education, 48(4), 213–225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakagawa, Y., & Payne, P. G. (2011). Experiencing beach in Australia: Study abroad students' perspectives. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 27(1), 94–108. doi:10.1017/S0814062600000100
   Google Scholar
• Nxumalo, F., & Pacini-Ketchabaw, V. (2017). ‘Staying with the trouble’ in child-insect-educator common worlds. Environmental Education Research. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/13504622.2017.1325447. doi:10.1080/13504622.2017.1325447
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Payne, P. (2018). The framing of ecopedagogy as/in scapes: Methodology of the issue. Journal of Environmental Education, 49(2), 71–87.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pacini-Ketchabaw, V., Taylor, A., & Blaise, M. (2016). Decentering the human in multispecies ethnographies. In C. Taylor & C. Hughes (Eds.), Posthuman research practices (pp. 149–167). Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Pedersen, H. (2010). Is ‘the posthuman’ educable? On the convergence of educational philosophy, animal studies, and posthumanist theory. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 31(2), 237–250.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pitt, H. (2017). Questioning care cultivated with more-than-human-communities. Social & Cultural Geography. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/14649365.2016.1275753. doi:10.1080/14649365.2016.1275753
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowe, B. (2011). Understanding animals-becoming-meat: Embracing a disturbing education. Critical Education, 2(7). Retrieved from http://m1.cust.educ.ubc.ca/journal/index.php/criticaled/article/view/132.
   Google Scholar
• Russell, C. (1999). Problematizing nature experience in environmental education. The interrelationship of experience and story. Journal of Experiential Education, 22(3), 123–128, 137. doi:10.1177/105382599902200304
   Google Scholar
• Russell, C. (2005). ‘Whoever does not write is written’: The role of ‘nature’ in post-post approaches to environmental education research. Environmental Education Research, 11(4), 433–443. doi:10.1080/13504620500169569
   Google Scholar
• Russell, C., & Bell, A. C. (1996). A politicized ethic of care: Environmental education from an ecofeminist perspective. In K. Warren (Ed.), Women's voices in experiential education (pp. 172–181). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.
   Google Scholar
• Russell, C., & Oakley, J. (2016). Editorial: The emotional dimensions of environmental education. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 21, 13–22.
   Google Scholar
• Russell, C., & Semenko, K. (2016). We take “cow” and compliment: Fattening humane, environmental, and social justice education. In E. Cameron & C. L. Russell (Eds.), The fat pedagogy reader: Challenging weight-based oppression through critical pedagogy (pp. 211–220). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Russell, J. (2013). Whose better? [re]Orienting a queer ecopedagogy. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 18, 11–26.
   Google Scholar
• Snaza, N. (2015). Toward a genealogy of educational humanism. In N. Snaza & J. A. Weaver (Eds.), Posthumanism and Educational Research (pp. 17–29). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, A. (2018). A Murray Cod assemblage: Re/considering riverScape pedagogy. Journal of Environmental Education, 49(2), 130–141.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevenson, R. B. (2007). Schooling and environmental education: Contradictions in purpose and practice. Environmental Education Research, 13(2), 139–153. doi:10.1080/13504620701295726
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, A., & Pacini-Ketchabaw, V. (2015). Learning with children, ants, and worms in the Anthropocene: Toward a common world pedagogy of multispecies vulnerability. Pedagogy, Culture, and Society, 23(4), 507–529. doi:10.1080/14681366.2015.1039050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, S. (2014). An introduction to eco-ability: The struggle for justice, with focus on humans with disabilities and nonhuman animals. Journal for Critical Animal Studies, 12(2), 95–117.
   Google Scholar
• The Humane Society of the United States. (2017). Pets by the numbers. Retrieved from http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/pet_overpopulation/facts/pet_ownership_statistics.html.
   Google Scholar
• Tuck, E., McKenzie, M., & McCoy, K. (2014). Land education: Indigenous, post-colonial, and decolonizing perspectives on place and environmental education research. Environmental Education Research, 20(1), 1–23. doi:10.1080/13504622.2013.877708
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Twine, R. (2010). Intersectional disgust? Animals and (eco)feminism. Feminist Psychology, 20(3), 397–406. doi:10.1177/0959353510368284
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolbring, G. (2014). An introduction to eco-ability: The struggle for justice, with focus on humans with disabilities and nonhuman animals. Journal for Critical Animal Studies, 12(2), 118–140.
   Google Scholar