Department of Geography

Book Review

Margins are central rather then peripheral to defining political identities. Italian national identity, though often seen as a fragile construct, is by no means unique in this regard. National identities must be constantly in question in order to thrive. Three geopolitical moments or forces are identified as having contributed at different times and in distinctive ways to the spatial construction of Italian identity: the border question, the immigrant/emigrant experience, and the North-South regional division.

Since the collapse of the postwar Italian party system in 1992-3, Italian politics has been dominated by the figure of Silvio Berlusconi, undoubtedly the major politician on the political center-right and elected as prime minister successively in 1994, 2001, and 2008. The image of Berlusconi as Italy’s political leader is often seen by commentators as much more positive at home than it has been abroad. Some well known foreign media, for example, have been much more consistently negative about Berlusconi’s dual role as media baron and political leader than have domestic media (and considerable public opinion) in Italy. If so, then Berlusconi’s exit from a central position in Italian politics may create external relief that he is gone and improved regard for Italy as a whole but at the expense of a huge “hole” that his absence may create domestically. On close analysis, however, The presumed gap between views of Berlusconi at “home” and “abroad” looks smaller, however, than conventional wisdom would suggest. At least over the recent course of his political career, he has stimulated a similar range of increasingly attitudinal negative responses both in Italy and elsewhere, although with variations over time everywhere and from place to place outside of Italy. These responses are increasingly negative, both at home and abroad. Berlusconi’s reputation is very much related to popular perceptions of his practical successes and failures as a leader and to what sort of leader he has actually been. It is not simply the result of a “battle” of media images without substantive content. This is encouraging news for those looking towards a future in which Italian politics will be less dominated by popular media such as television and its presumed manipulation of a totally pliant electorate. The exit of the “big seducer” will leave a troubling legacy of unresolved problems while also creating openings for a political future in which Italians may be more collectively invested.

"Sovranismo" has become the “go-to” word to use in contrasting those advocating “take back control” and nationalism against the “globalists” who are the bête noire of populism. This paper discusses the recent provenance of the word and the impluses that underlie it. It then considers the various arguments for sovranismo more broadly. The final section discusses the actual history of state sovereignty and suggests that current usage lacks much understanding of its complexities.

Abstract Scientific assessments play a critical role in synthesizing evidence to support evidence-based decision-making in many sectors and topics. For climate change, large-scale assessments like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the U.S. National Climate Assessment (NCA) reports help many different users—from national government to local governments, Indigenous Peoples and communities, the private sector, the social sector, and the scientific community itself—navigate the complex field of climate risks, impacts, and integrated solutions. While cocreation with users is essential to developing actionable assessments, this paper lays the groundwork for future processes by identifying many advancing and emerging areas of relevant knowledge ready for assessment or additional near-term research. Drawing on the expertise of many scholars who were formerly tasked with producing the Sixth NCA and authors of other national or subnational climate assessment reports, this paper highlights select U.S.-relevant topics in which research advances since the 2023 Fifth NCA make new syntheses particularly valuable for future national, subnational, and sectoral climate assessments. It also identifies critical research topics in those select areas that would be useful for future climate assessment efforts. Overall, this research priorities road map aims to catalyze collaborations, research, and a network of climate assessments to synthesize the state of climate impacts, risks, and responses and to provide widely accessible and foundational information for sectoral, regional, and cross-cutting climate action plans and decisions in the United States. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY Scientific assessments are critical in informing households, communities, businesses, institutions, and governments as they respond to intensifying climate hazards. As climate change impacts accelerate, the pace of assessment and integration of science with decision-making and action must accelerate as well. A network of U.S. climate assessment efforts could rapidly synthesize actionable science and case studies to inform climate response strategies. To support future processes, this paper presents a selection of foundational topics needing assessment and near-term research across climate impacts, risks, and actions from the perspective of the United States and some of its key regions, environments, and economic sectors. For example, assessment is needed for the increasing threats posed by compound extremes and cascading climate risks, which can overwhelm systems developed for independent events. The effectiveness of climate responses likewise requires continuous evaluation and improvement, with consideration of the broader impacts (e.g., economic, environmental, health) associated with those strategies. System-level understanding of integrated climate response strategies can be advanced by combining observations and modeling with mitigation, adaptation, climate interventions, disaster management, and resilience decision scenarios. Overall, these research priorities aim to encourage new research and future national, regional, local, and sectoral climate assessments that support climate-informed decision-making in the United States.

Abstract Scientific assessments play a critical role in synthesizing evidence to support evidence‐based decision‐making in many sectors and topics. For climate change, large‐scale assessments like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the United States (U.S.) National Climate Assessment (NCA) reports help many different users—from national government to local governments, Indigenous Peoples and communities, the private sector, the social sector, and the scientific community itself—navigate the complex field of climate risks, impacts, and integrated solutions. While co‐creation with users is essential to developing actionable assessments, this paper lays the groundwork for future processes by identifying many advancing and emerging areas of relevant knowledge ready for assessment or additional near‐term research. Drawing on the expertise of many scholars who were formerly tasked with producing the Sixth NCA and authors of other national or sub‐national climate assessment reports, this paper highlights select U.S.‐relevant topics in which research advances since the 2023 Fifth NCA make new syntheses particularly valuable for future national, sub‐national, and sectoral climate assessments. It also identifies critical research topics in those select areas that would be useful for future climate assessment efforts. Overall, this research priorities roadmap aims to catalyze collaborations, research, and a network of climate assessments to synthesize the state of climate impacts, risks, and responses and to provide widely accessible and foundational information for sectoral, regional, and cross‐cutting climate action plans and decisions in the U.S. Plain Language Summary Scientific assessments are critical in informing households, communities, businesses, institutions, and governments as they respond to intensifying climate hazards. As climate change impacts accelerate, the pace of assessment and integration of science with decision‐making and action must accelerate as well. A network of U.S. climate assessment efforts could rapidly synthesize actionable science and case studies to inform climate response strategies. To support future processes, this paper presents a selection of foundational topics needing assessment and near‐term research across climate impacts, risks, and actions from the perspective of the U.S. and some of its key regions, environments, and economic sectors. For example, assessment is needed for the increasing threats posed by compound extremes and cascading climate risks, which can overwhelm systems developed for independent events. The effectiveness of climate responses likewise requires continuous evaluation and improvement, with consideration of the broader impacts (e.g., economic, environmental, health) associated with those strategies. System‐level understanding of integrated climate response strategies can be advanced by combining observations and modeling with mitigation, adaptation, climate interventions, disaster management, and resilience decision scenarios. Overall, these research priorities aim to encourage new research and future national, regional, local, and sectoral climate assessments that support climate‐informed decision‐making in the U.S. Key Points A network of climate assessments plays a critical role in synthesizing the state of science to support evidence‐based decision‐making To support future U.S. and sub‐national climate assessments, we identify scientific advancements and research needs important to synthesize We encourage submissions to the AGU/AMS U.S. Climate Collection to advance syntheses of climate systems, risks, impacts and solutions

Abstract This article, co‐authored by encampment and university scholars, is concerned with how homeless persons challenge rightlessness. We do so by advancing a conceptual framework of common sense law, arguing that such contestations take place not only in courtrooms but also in the lived spaces of homelessness. Drawing on five years of ethnography, we foreground how homeless persons become proficient in the law as well as in self‐advocacy, navigating and resisting state power, be it the edicts of criminalization or the labyrinth of bureaucratization. In doing so, we seek to understand housing justice as rights from below as well as a process of making right, a form of redress for perceived injuries. Our conceptual framework of common sense law derives from the specificity of the North American context where homeless personhood is constituted both within and against liberal arrangements of property. Often deployed in spaces such as the street, where property arrangements are contested by those consigned to spatial precarity, common sense law is a re‐formation of liberalism and its constitutionally protected rights.

Thinking from Los Angeles, amid the expanding criminalization of homelessness, we advance a conceptual framework of encampment geographies. We argue that the homeless encampment must be understood in relation to state power, specifically the state as landlord. As residents of state spaces—sidewalks, shelters, interim housing—encampment dwellers are institutionalized. This includes interpellation in humanitarian exchange, notably through forms of mutual aid that emerge in the interstices of state violence. Drawing on ethnographic research and movement histories at Aetna Street, we present three encampment geographies: return, refuge, and refusal. We conceptualize the encampment as a site of enforced return and a space of refuge whose residents are akin to refugees. In doing so, we situate the homeless encampment in a global geography of camps, drawing on literatures that are attentive to expulsion, containment, and asylum. Yet encampment residents refuse enclosure, in particular, exploitation and its articulation in wage–rent relations. In keeping with Aetna's history as a node of Black life in Los Angeles, we study these geographies of struggle guided by Black feminist theory, notably the Practicing Refusal Collective. In doing so, we conceptualize the encampment as a form of living within and beyond racial capitalism.

Rapid increases in wildfire area burned across North American forests pose novel challenges for managers and society. Increasing area burned raises questions about whether, and to what degree, contemporary fire regimes (1984–2022) are still departed from historical fire regimes (pre-1880). We use the North American tree-ring fire-scar network (NAFSN), a multi-century record comprising >1800 fire-scar sites spanning diverse forest types, and contemporary fire perimeters to ask whether there is a contemporary fire surplus or fire deficit, and whether recent fire years are unprecedented relative to historical fire regimes. Our results indicate, despite increasing area burned in recent decades, that a widespread fire deficit persists across a range of forest types and recent years with exceptionally high area burned are not unprecedented when considering the multi-century perspective offered by fire-scarred trees. For example, ‘record’ contemporary fire years such as 2020 burned 6% of NAFSN sites—the historical average—well below the historical maximum of 29% sites that burned in 1748. Although contemporary fire extent is not unprecedented across many North American forests, there is abundant evidence that unprecedented contemporary fire severity is driving forest loss in many ecosystems and adversely impacting human lives, infrastructure, and water supplies.