Transformation as praxis: responding to climate change uncertainties in marginal environments in South Asia Lyla Mehta1,2, Shilpi Srivastava
1, Synne Movik
2,
Hans Nicolai Adam
3, Rohan D’Souza
4,
Devanathan Parthasarathy
5, Lars Otto Naess
1and Nobuhito Ohte
4Thispaperprovidessomeoftheconceptualand
methodologicalunderpinningsbeingdevelopedintheongoing TAPESTRYprojectwhichispartoftheTransformationsto Sustainability(T2S)Programme.Wedebatehowthenotionof transformationmaybeconceptualizedfrom‘below’inmarginal environmentsthatareespeciallymarkedbyhighlevelsof climate-relateduncertainties.Weproposethenotionof transformationaspraxis—wherethefocusisonbottom-up change,identities,wellbeingandtherecoveryofagencyby marginalizedpeopleandexplorehow‘patches’andthe
‘marginal’offercriticalconceptualtemplatestoexamine whetherandhowsystemictransformativechangesarebeing assembledandeffectedonthegroundbyhybridand transformativealliances.Thearticleconcludesbydiscussing potentialchallengesofsuchengagements,alongsidepursuing anormativeandpoliticalapproachtoT2S.
Addresses
1TheInstituteofDevelopmentStudies,LibraryRoad,Brighton,BN1 9RE,UK
2NorwegianUniversityofLifeSciences,Universitetstunet3,A˚sNO-1432 Norway
3NorwegianInstituteforWaterResearch,NIVA,Gaustadalle´en21,Oslo 0349,Norway
4KyotoUniversity,YoshidaHonmachi,Sakyo-ku,Kyoto606-8501, Japan
5IndianInstituteofTechnology,Powai,Mumbai400076,India Correspondingauthor:Mehta,Lyla(l.mehta@ids.ac.uk)
CurrentOpinioninEnvironmentalSustainability2021,49:110–117 ThisreviewcomesfromathemedissueonTransformationsto sustainability:criticalsocialscienceperspectives
EditedbyEmilyBoyd,EduardoBrondizioandEleanorFisher
Received:21October2020;Accepted:06April2021
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2021.04.002
1877-3435/ã2021TheAuthors.PublishedbyElsevierB.V.Thisisan openaccessarticleundertheCCBYlicense(http://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Introduction
Climate change is a key threat to the sustainability of societies and their environments [1,2]. Yet, knowledge
about the scale and impact of these changes remains deeply uncertain. This is particularly true at the local level,where uncertainties manifest themselves both in highlyvariableecologicalsystemsandininteractionwith other drivers of change [3], thereby exacerbating the existingvulnerabilitiesofmarginalisedcommunities.Cli- mate uncertainties are particularly acute in marginal environments (drylands, deltas and coastal ecosystems) where extreme events such as droughts, floods and cyclonesintersectwith theunevenimpacts ofcapitalist expansion and threaten people’s well-being as well as theirsenseof placeandidentity.
Climate-related uncertainty refers to the inability to predictthescale,intensityandimpactofclimatechange onhumanandnaturalenvironments[4].Uncertaintiesin climatechangeprojectionsremainparticularlyhighand, combinedwitheconomicandpoliticaldriversofchange, makelocal-leveleffectsdifficulttopredict[5].Thereisa growingacknowledgementthatclimatescienceisbetter at dealing with uncertainties that arise due to macro trends,suchastemperatureextremesandsealevelrise, thanunderstandingtheeffectsatthelocallevel.Thisis duetodownscalingchallenges[6]whichoftencreate‘the envelope of uncertainty’[7] that intersects with social, political,economic,culturalandscientificdomains,lead- ingtoacascadeof uncertainties[8].
Uncertaintycanbe:aleatoric,referringtonaturalfluctua- tions, high degrees of variability and disequilibrium dynamicshavingunknowneffects[9];epistemic,dealing withindeterminate knowledgeaboutchangesand their impacts[5];orlinkedtolargerpoliticaleconomiccondi- tions,includingunanticipatedoutcomesofsocio-political interventionsand how they are experienced bydiverse groups [10,11]. While uncertainty can exacerbate anxi- etiesabout thefuture [12,13],ourstarting point is that uncertainty can also provide an opportunity to create systemic transformative changes in so called marginal environments.
Wedemonstratehistoricallyhow distinctionshavebeen createdbetween ‘marginal environments’ (subjected to unpredictable natural events) and the ‘environmental normal’ regions, referring to the relatively productive, stable and predictable zones [14].We argue that such
negativeportrayalsarenotonlymisleadingbut,critically, do not capture local residents’ understandings of their environmentsandlivelihoods,thereforecallingforalterna- tiveframingsofsuch‘marginal’environmentsaswellasthe lives and livelihoods that they sustain. The ‘marginal environments’ that we are studying are disaster-prone andcharacterizedbyecologicaluncertaintiesarisingfrom floods, wetlandloss/degradation and droughtsas well as rapid socio-economic change, often leading to growing inequalityandvulnerabilityofmarginalizedpeople.While localcommunitiesmayhavehistoricallydevelopedprac- ticesandmemoriestodealwithuncertaintiesarisingdueto environmentalvariabilityandseasonality[15],thesemight not be sufficient to respond to the radical uncertainties generated by current climate change impacts [16] and further exacerbated by socio-economic trajectories. In response,statedriveninterventionshavetendedtoresort to bureaucratic, techno-centric/top down approaches geared towards ‘controlling uncertainty’ [17,18,10] yet theseoftenfalterorcanharmcertaingroups,inparticular thepoor[19].Giventhesechallenges,actionisrequired thatgoesbeyondincrementalchangeandinsteadwarrants systemictransformativechange[20,21].
Inthispaper,wefocusonlinkagesbetweenuncertainty and transformation in marginal environments. Building on some of the conceptual and methodological under- pinnings being developed in the TAPESTRY project, which is part of the Transformations to Sustainability (T2S)Programme,6wefocusonhowtransformationmay bediscussedandconceptualizedfrom‘below’inmarginal environments thataremarkedbyhigh levelsof climate change induced uncertainties. We suggest that ‘local’
(patches) and the idea of transformation as praxis are critical conceptual templates to help map and explain how systemic transformative changescanbeassembled andeffectedonthegroundthrougharangeofinteractions between socialactors, socio-economic and politicalpro- cesses and co-produced knowledges. We then turn to some of the methodological underpinnings of this approach before concluding by examining some of the potentialchallengesofsuchengagements,alongsidepur- suinganormativeandpoliticalapproach toT2S.
Whatis transformation?
Theideaoftransformationinresponsetoclimatechangeis rootedinmultipledisciplinesandmeansdifferentthingsto different scholarships.Thismakesitchallengingtocometo aconsensusonwhat‘transformation’actuallyentails[22].
Contemporarymainstreamapproachesinbothadaptation and mitigation have tended to be only incremental in nature or even maladaptive [21,23]. Despite the many divergences in the transformation literature, a general consensus is that transformation goes beyond marginal change, is non-linear and challenges the status quo of
existingdevelopmentstructures[24,21,25,26].Itrequires innovationandaprofoundshiftinthewaywethinkandact, including ourvalues, consumptionpatterns andconcep- tions of well-being, which are closely associated with understandingsofculture,placeandidentity.Akeyissue istoframetheideasoftransformationnotonlyintermsof respondingtothreats,butalsoasmomentsofopportunity andpolicywindows[18].
We thus ask how and whether uncertainty can be an opportunity to reframe how we view marginal environ- mentsandbringabouttransformativechangeco-produced with local communities and other actors (see also Ref.
[27]).FollowingFewetal.[28],wedistinguishbetween transformationaladaptation,whichtendstoaddressimme- diatecausesofvulnerability,fromtransformativeadapta- tion,whichcanbeanopportunitytoaddressrootcausesand in effect ‘to reconfigure the meaning and trajectory of development’ [24]. This means questioning dominant economic and development discourses that require the reconfigurationofknowledgeandvaluesystems,andthe reorganisation of institutions and frameworks [28]. Our focusisalsoondeliberateasopposedtoemergentoroutcome transformation. Deliberateefforts seekto alter develop- mentpathwaysawayfromthosethatcausecurrentvulner- abilities [26], unravelling development alternatives that tackleclimatechangeuncertaintiesandaddressmarginal- ity and vulnerability. We are mindful that no historical precedent of a deliberate transformation of this nature exists [29] and that uncertainty can also be politicised and canserve as afig leaffor thestatus quo.Thus, we followBlytheetal.[30]whowarnagainstthedarksidesof transformationandthe ‘latent risks’inthe shiftfrommerely pursuingdescriptiveoutcomes(emergent)toprescriptive (deliberate) approaches. That is, in merely shifting the response burden to the most vulnerable, transformation discourses can be used to justify business as usual by ignoringsocial differentiation, overlookingconflict or oppo- sitiontochangeandpayinginsufficientattentiontopower andpolitics.
These risks count for both macro and micro scales, including bottom-up initiatives. We take a normative stance and position the needs and interests of margin- alised communities in marginal environments upfront, recognising that thesecommunities will besociallydif- ferentiated due to caste, gender, class, Adivasi (tribal), ethnicity, religion, knowledge, the capacity to act and power relations (both between individuals and within communities andbetweenindividualsandcommunities and the state). Social and intergenerational differences mayalsoleadtodifferentunderstandingsoftransforma- tionacross individualsandsocialsegments. Buildingon earlier T2S projects, our normative position involves a kindof‘transgressivelearning’that‘intentionallygener- atescriticalthinkingandcollectiveagencyandpraxisthat directlyandexplicitlychallengesthoseaspectsofsociety
6https://steps-centre.org/project/tapestry/.
thathave becomenormalized’[31].This meansfocus- sing specifically on issues of epistemic, environmental, social and gender injustices as well as domination and privilegeupfront.
Patchesand praxis
TAPESTRY focuses on how transformation may arise from ‘below’ in marginal environments through hybrid alliancesbetweennaturalresourcedependentcommuni- ties, NGOs(non-governmentalorganisations), scientists and(sympathetic)stateagencies.Suchalliancesandtheir initiatives serve as ‘seeds’ or ‘socio-ecological bright spots’ that can improve environmental conditions and human well-being [32]. We ask whether they can also provide scope to reimagine nature/society relations in environmentsaffectedbyclimate-changerelateduncer- tainties.Wecallthese‘patches oftransformation’—sites and exemplars amidst largely unsustainable processes where hybrid alliances, and their innovative initiatives, reimaginesustainabledevelopmentandinspiretransfor- mative societal changesthat canbe scaled up and out.
Whileacknowledgingthatsuchemergentprocessesmay be resisted by incumbent players and may not always challenge underlying inequalities associated with class, ethnicity,genderorcaste[33],webelievethathybridand co-producedinitiativesprovideafertilegroundformore embedded,inductiveandbottom-upprocessesoftrans- formation.Eachpatchisunique;somefade,othersgrow ormergeto formatapestry.
Patches are sites where specific processes (alliances, initiatives)arechallengingdominanttrajectoriesofdevel- opment,andwhererelationsofpowerandknowledgeare beingreconfiguredinmoreheterogeneousanddelibera- tivewaystochallengedominantframingsofnature-soci- ety relations and create spaces in which new practices emerge. Thus, collaborative and deliberative projects which seek to reframe dominant practices and tackle questionsofpowerand privilegeupfrontin thecontext of sustainability may be understood as patches. Rather thandevelopfixedcriteriaupfront,wemapprocessesof makingandunmakingastheyunfold.Towardstheendof theproject,wemayprovidesomeexemplarsandprocess- based criteria regarding how these patches and their relatedalliancesandstrategiescanbescaledupandout.
The discursive struggles over place and space are as importantasthephysicalnatureofthesitesthemselves.
Suchpracticestakeplacebetweenhybridactors(e.g.local communities,scientists,NGOs)andinvolvequestioning, reframing and reconfiguring constellations of power, knowledge and identities. Drawing on Haraway’s [34]
ideaofChthulucene–‘themakingofkin’–thisinvolves forging new networks, tentacles and webs that lead to new alliances across classes and categories of people, species,knowledgegroups as wellas relationsof power anddominance.
In each of our patches, initiatives around livelihoods, biodiversity,pollutionabatementorsustainableresource usearechallengingdominantnarrativesofclimaterelated uncertaintyinmarginalenvironments(seebelow).These discoursesand practices maystart in small and experi- mentalways,andwewillexaminewaysinwhichtheycan bescaledupandoutfromthepatches.Thus,ournotionof patchesfocusesnotjustontheinnovationpersebutmore importantly on the strategies of the disempowered in marginalspaceswho arepartofhybrid alliances.
TAPESTRYis concerned with two aspects of transfor- mation: how transformation happens in these ‘patches’
throughco-productionandalliancesandhowtheseinitia- tivescan bescaled up and out —in sum thepraxis of transformation. We define praxis as a reflexive process involving botha critique of the existingsocial arrange- ments/statusquoandthesearchforalternatives [35,36].
Webuildonarichtraditionoftheoriesofsocialchange, emphasisingtheinterplayofagencyandsocialreproduc- tion[37–39,40,41]aswellasthemultiplewaysofvaluing, knowing and doing [42]. Importantly, praxis may be exploredasthecapabilitytochange[43–45].Successive judgements across scales and in many dimensions will interlinkto makeup transformation,affectingitslikeli- hoodandquality.
As a concept, praxis challenges the duality between theory and implementation (theory and practice) or knowing and doing [42] and underlines that change occursthroughanongoingdialecticbetweenknowledge andpractice.Thereisacertainnormativitytoourideaof praxisasthisismoreabout‘changingthanmerelyinter- pretingtheworld’[46].Inotherwords,buildingonactor- orientedapproaches,changeisnotjustpredeterminedby structuralforcesandisnotalwayshistoricallydetermined.
Praxisis akey dimensionin structurationtheorywhich looksattheinterplayofstructureandagencyandhowthe social order is produced, reproduced or subverted [47].
Structurationtheoryhoweverdoesnotexplicitlyaddress questionsof radicalsocialchange,disruptivepowerand transgressionsof‘normalised’socialorder[48].Following Freire [40]we take an emancipatoryunderstanding of praxisasitislinkedtoself-conscioussocialactions[40], linkedtocertainvalues(justice,equity,capabilityexpan- sion)andtheongoingdialectic betweenknowledgeand practice. This is also linked closely to the idea of
‘deliberate’ transformation or informed action which seeks to facilitate socially just processes through an explicitly normative positioning of praxis as value-ori- entedandbottom-up change.7
7Ourapproachisdifferentfromcollectiveactiontheorieswhichtend tolookatactioninaninstrumentalwayintermsofachievingcommon goalswithoutlookingatthetensionsandcontractionsintheoutcomesas wellasthornyissuesofsocialdifferentiation,powerandpolitics.
Transformation aspraxis isanembedded,reflexive and engagedprocessofchangeaimedtowardstransformation oftheselfandthewidersocialandpolitical/institutional arrangementsandisanattempttoreconfigurethedomi- nant development trajectory. Thus,for any meaningful transformationtooccur,weneedtoengagewithchangeat the individual and collective (i.e. patches) as well as institutional levels. To study and be part of these pro- cessesprovideimportantopportunitiesfortransformative science.
Keytotransformativepraxisisabetterunderstandingof how agency can be strengthened to bring about deep- seated structural alterations in the patches and conse- quentlyinformwidersocietalchanges.Humanagencyis central toresponses toenvironmental changeandcrises [49] and constitutesthe personalsphere through which transformationscanbemotivated[50].Thus,itisimpor- tant to engage with how and whether practices of co- producing socio-ecological knowledge (on agriculture, livestock, livelihoods and ecosystem conservation) can enhancetheagencyofpeoplelivinginmarginalareasto transformexistingsocio-politicalstructuresofpowerand recognitionandassesswhethersuchinitiativescanserve tocounterentrenchedinjusticesandpoliticalexclusionin current systems of knowledge-making, governance and valuation [51].
Theprocessesofscalingupandoutwilllinktransforma- tionsacrossthepersonal,inter-personalandwidersociety [50].Theyincludeadiversityofactors(localcommuni- ties,stateagencies,civilsocietyandacademics)toforge transformative alliances that challenge dominant power structures.Inthisway,weexpandonO’BrienandSygna’s [50]conceptof‘spheresoftransformation’(namelyprac- tical, politicalandpersonal)throughournotionoftrans- formativealliances,asitbringsallthreespheresintoplay.
Uncertainty, meaningmakingand the reframing ofmarginal environmentsin the patches
We are studying and co-producing transformation in selective patches in marginal areas of India and Bangladesh. Both countries have ecologically dynamic environments at risk from climate shocks and stressors whilewitnessingacceleratedcapitalistgrowthtrajectories thatexacerbatesocial andpoliticalinequities,with high environmentalcostsaffectingthepoor.Theyalsofacea range of climatic challenges, including rising average temperature, high rainfall variability, changes in river flow regimes,sea-levelriseandflooding whichintersect with otherdrivers ofchangesuchas industrialdevelop- ment,resourcegrabsandwiderpolitics[3].Ourpatches areMumbai,amega-urbancoastalregioninwesternIndia largelyreclaimedfromthesea.InurbanMumbai,coastal ecosystems,mangrovesandwetlandshavebeensystem- atically appropriated by thestate and private actorsfor
commercial and infrastructure development purposes, negativelyaffectingthelivelihoods,wellbeingandiden- titiesoftheKolifisherswhoaretheoriginalinhabitantsof theregion.Togetherwithcivilsocietygroups–Bombay 61andtheConservationActionTrust–weareworking with fishers on issues concerning mangrove restoration and appropriationbypowerful actorsas wellas sustain- ablewastemanagementofthecreeksthroughinnovative methods.KutchisadrylandlocatedinthestateofGujarat whereherdershavebeensystematicallymarginalisedand climate and other changes (e.g. rapid industrialisation along thecoast)have madetheirlivelihoodsevenmore precarious. The Kharai (swimming) camel is a unique indigenous breed but its habitat is under threat due to industrialisation on the coast which is destroying the mangrove eco-system. We are working with Sahjeevan andtheCamelBreeder’sAssociation(KUUMS)oninitia- tivesthatseekto helppastoralistsreclaimtheirpastoral identitiesandlifestylesaswellasdeveloplivelihoodsthat areclimateresilientandflexible.TheSundarbansdeltain India and Bangladesh is hometo the largestmangrove forest area in the world, recognized by UNESCO as a world heritage site due to its ecological and cultural significance.Itisalsoconsideredtobeaclimatechange
‘hotspot’duetofrequentnaturaldisasters(e.g.cyclones, stormsurgeflooding,landerosion)andclimaticstressors (sealevelrise,disappearingislands).IntheSundarbans, alliancesbetweenNGOs,scientistsandlocalpeoplehave beenchallengingstate-dominateddevelopmenttrajecto- riesthathavetendedtoneglectthedynamicnatureofthe delta and are also exploring new farming and fishing methodsthatcanhelpstrengthenanddiversifylivelihood options inthedelta.
Throughtheseinitiativesinthepatches,weareseeking toreconceptualisewhathavebeenhithertoconsideredas marginal environments by reimaginingthem insteadas vibrant spaces of transformative change. Why is this important?Environmentalhistorianshavedemonstrated howlargeswathesofSouthAsia,throughthecourseofthe longnineteenthcenturyunderBritishcolonialrule,were classified under the broad rubrics of ‘marginal environments’ontheonehand, andthe‘environmental normal’ onthe other[14]. Thiscolonial administrative perception arose from thebeliefthat marginalenviron- ments were hostage to extreme natural events such as droughts,floods,earthquakesandviolentriverbehaviour, whilethe‘environmentalnormal’regionsreferredtothe relativelystable,predictableandproductivezonesofthe British empire. This ‘marginality’ trope also reinforced other stereotypes such as remoteness from the main centres of wealth and being peopled by impoverished communitiesofpastoralists,herders,nomads,subsistence cultivators,artisanalfishersandforesttribes.Historically, as well as in current times, the contrasts between the
‘marginal’ and the ‘normal’ shape different types of administrativeinterventionsandstatecapacitiesandalso
createsociologicalandeconomicdistinctions.According toDamodaranandD’Souza[14]themarginalwasabout subsistence communities that were characterised by mobility, vulnerability and regular environmental dis- tress, while the normal was comprised of commercial farming communities, revenue paying peasantry and environmentsdefinedbytheirlegibilityassitesforcom- modityproduction.
Inhabitants of these marginal environments, moreover, havebeensubjected tothebiasof the‘normal’.Pastor- alists, for example, have been subject to policies for forcedsedentarisationandfishersonMumbai’scoasthave hadtheirclaimsonthecity’smarshesandedgeecologies ignored or criminalized. Similarly, in the Sundarbans, cultivators have often been portrayed as only living in desperatepovertyandthereforeinneedofaplannedexit strategy.
Ourresearch however, buildingon local residents’ own understandings of their localities,is seeking to reframe suchconceptionsof‘marginalenvironments’.Forexam- ple, some pastoralist groups and activists are reframing drylandsfrombeing‘wastelands’tosavannahlandscapes that can successfully sustain pastoralist livelihoods and recognise the synergistic human-environment relation- ships.Similarly,someofMumbai’sKolisarethemselves engaged in struggles to reframe their community lands from‘slums’tocoastalzoneareasdeservingofprotection (CRZ III zone areas) and to properly demarcate the boundaries of their communal land in urban planning maps.Thus,transformativealliancesrequirenewstories and imaginings to guide and make sense of new com- plexitiesanduncertainties[34].Thereisimmensepossi- bility here to examine how individuals and groups of peoplecanre-imagineuncertainmarginalenvironments suchasdrylandsorwetlandstopushbackagainstdomi- nantframingsandtrajectoriesof development.
TAPESTRY recognizes the messiness and entangle- ments embedded in co-production, scaling up/out and workingtowardschange.Ateverypoint,itisimportantto beawareofthepowerladennatureofsuchprocesses,the trade-offsbetweencompetinginterestsanddemandsand alsotorecognisethatemergentprocessesmayormaynot alwayschallenge the underlying inequalities and social dynamicsthatariseduetoclass,ethnicity,caste,gender, minorityandadivasi(tribal)dynamics.Itisthusimportant to also engage critically with knowledge intermediaries (namely,frontline bureaucrats,activists,grassrootwork- ers,CBOs,academicsandalsocommunity leaders)who speakonbehalfoflocal people.
Methodologicalconsiderations
Transformation,whetherincrementalorstructural,needs tobelookedatandevaluatedfromalonguedure´eperspec- tivesothatthechangescanbemappedoutbothfortheir
shortandlong-termimpactsonsocio-ecologicalsystems.
The focus on praxis also lends itself to action-oriented researchguided byreflexivity,dialogueandnegotiation betweenallthepartnerswhereresearchisalsotreatedas beingpartofthedesignforsteeringandrealizingchanged outcomesontheground.
In each patch,the work is taking place in atransdisci- plinary collaboration involving both researchers and CBOs. Through art-based and visual methods (photo- voice),weareelicitingstoriesandnarrativesfrombelow and the margins to counter elite perceptions of lands, resources as well as the lived experiences of the neo- liberalprocessesofaccumulationofcoastalresourcesand spaces. Since we are interested in reframing marginal landscapes,wearefocusingontheknowledgedynamics andcontestationsthatexistaroundsocio-ecologicalrela- tions, such as therelations betweencamel grazing and mangrovesordiverseperceptionsofthequalityofwater increeks,riversandalongthecoastlines.Here,weseekto demonstrate the perceptions of local women and men, civil society and officials to qualitatively understand diversenarrativesaroundthedynamicsofenvironmental changeovertime.
Additionally,archivalresearchinallthepatchesprovides historicallysituatedunderstandingsofuncertaintyaswell as contrasts between official and local responses. The notionofthetemporal,ineffect,forthepurposesofour project,will requireus to grasp the historicalnature of changerather thanacceptingtime as asimpleseamless movementinspace.Consequently,wewillbeattentiveto aspectsoftemporalcontinuitiesinlocalcontextsasmuch aswewillbealerttodifferencesbroughtonbymoments ofsharprupturesuchascolonialismandtheimpetusfor modernization and industrialisation. In sum, historical frameworksandapproacheswillbecriticalto informing ourunderstandingofenvironmentalandsocialchangein thepatches.Wealsodrawuponnaturalsciencemethods (e.g.GIS, remotesensing andparticipatorymapping)to examinelandscapedynamics,patternsandchangesover time. This tempo-spatial information and mappingcan hopefully validate discredited indigenous ecological knowledges, and help in improving our understanding of people’s stories and narratives around human-nature relationsandvalues,for example,camel-mangroverela- tionsin Kutch.
Normativeconsiderations, challengesand conclusions
While conceptual thinking on transformation has seen considerable interest and growth in recent years [22], thereremainsadearthofempiricalevidencethatexplores bottom-upprocessesof transformation,thatis,theirdri- vers, challenges and outcomes for sustainability/social andgenderjustice.Thetransformationliteratureremains vagueregardingnormativepositionsandhowtoactualize
transformation,withsomenotableexceptions(e.g.Refs.
[52,31]).Thispaperpresentsanormativeprojectbuilt ontheideaoftransformationas praxis. However,ithas alsooutlinedsomeofthebarriers,challengesandoppor- tunities forsystemictransformation.
Researching ‘transformation as praxis’ involves addres- singmultipleunderstandingsandperceptionsofvulner- abilities,anduncertaintiesfromdiverseactors(e.g.state, researchers, activists, environmentalists, NGOs, urban and rural dwellers), with an aim of seeking epistemic justiceformarginalisedvoicesandpeople[52].However, what counts as transformation or not is not straightfor- ward. We observed during fieldwork before the pan- demic8 that it is difficult for local communities (both ruralandurban)torespondtoabstractquestionsregard- ingtransformationbecauseofquestionsofscale,attribu- tion, and temporality. While the local communities are affectedby thehereand now, transformationis usually associated withchanging widersystemsthat arehistori- cally enmeshed in unequal power relations, landscape imaginariesandecologicalchanges.AsBlytheetal.[30] and Taylor [23] have noted, insufficiently addressing broaderpoliticaleconomyfactorsmayobscurequestions ofresponsibilityandshiftit‘downwards’toindividualsat thecommunitylevel.Weareawareofsuchrisks,butposit that the patches and the bottom-up approach of
‘transformation as praxis’may, in fact, providean entry pointtochallengepreciselysuchincumbentpowerstruc- turesthroughmultiple(collective)strategies,atdifferent scaleswhilegivingavoicetovulnerableresidentsinthe patches.Additionally,byworkingwithlocalpartnerswho are also involved in documenting and challenging gov- ernment policies through legal processes and advocacy work,ourfocusisalsoonmacrolevelchangesatthecityor regionalscale(e.g.issuesrelatedtofloodriskmitigationin Mumbaiandmangroveconservationalongthecoastline).
Italsoleadsustoquestioning‘whoisseeingtransforma- tionandforwhom?’.Thus,thereisanadditionalethical responsibilityonthepartofresearchersandpractitioners toreflectcarefullyontheprocessesunfoldingandwrestle withthesepluralmeanings,tensionsandcontradictions.
While addressing livelihood security in a context of climatechangeuncertainties,wealsoneedtobemindful oftrade-offsbetweenenvironmentalandsocialgoalsand bevigilantto maladaptivepathwaysthatcouldinadver- tently bepromoted inthepatches.For example,prawn cultivationoraquaculturecanprovidelivelihoodsecurity but may not be environmentally sustainable. Our approach is not to provide immediate relief but to
comprehendhistoricalchangesinorder tosuggestmore sustainable long term solutions, especially since liveli- hoodsandsocialgoalssuchasequityandjusticecannotbe addressed only through technical approaches to risk reductionorlivelihoods.
Finally,candoingresearchinthemidstofapandemicbe seenasanopportunityfortransformation?Thepandemic haslaidbareproblemsofinequalitiesandunequalaccess topublicgoodssuchashealth,waterandsanitation.The pandemichasalsointersectedwithongoingcrisesoffood, pollution, water and climate, thus threatening already fragile livelihoods,especiallyinmarginal environments, compounding uncertainties and vulnerabilities for mar- ginalized people. In our patches, the responses from above havebeen inadequate, too late,or complete fail- ures. Still, we have seen a burst of mutual aid and solidarity as well as civic action. There are also many examples of resilience at the local level, especially amongstseveralpastoralists,fishersandfarmerswhohave turned to subsistence production. Historical studies of epidemicshaveshownhowtheycanleadtonewvisions aboutpolitical andsocietalorganization [53].The post- COVID recovery period should thus build on these lessons and hopefully bring about the systemic shifts badlyneeded toaddresslocallyappropriate andsocially justtransformations tosustainability.
Funding
This work was supported by the TAPESTRY project.
TheprojectTAPESTRYisfinanciallysupportedbythe Belmont Forum and NORFACE Joint Research Pro- gramme on Transformations to Sustainability, which is co-fundedbyESRC, ISC,JST,RCN andtheEuropean Commission through Horizon 2020 under grant agree- mentNo730211.Openaccesspublicationwassupported by the UKRI Open Access Block Award 2021 (EP/
W522788/1).TheauthorsaregratefultotheTransforma- tionsto Sustainabilityprogramme forthegeneroussup- port. Wethank theeditorsof thespecial issue for their patienceandsupportandRubyUttingforcopyeditingthe paper.
Conflictofinterest statement Nothingdeclared.
References and recommendedreading
Papersofparticularinterest,publishedwithintheperiodofreview, havebeenhighlightedas:
ofspecialinterest
1. AdgerW,BarnettJ,BrownK,MarshallN,O’BrienK:Cultural dimensionsofclimatechangeimpactsandadaptation.Nat ClimChange2013,3:112-117http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/
nclimate1666.
2. HulmeM:WhyWeDisagreeAboutClimateChange:
UnderstandingControversy,InactionandOpportunity.
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress;2009.
8We had begun ethnographic and in-depth fieldwork in all the patcheswhichatthetimeofwritinghasbeensuspendedduetothe pandemic.Whilesomeresearchistakingplacedigitally(e.g.through onlinemediatedinterviews),wearehopingsomefieldworkcanresume soon.
3. MehtaL,SrivastavaS,AdamHN,AlankarSB,GhoshU,KumarVV:
Climatechangeanduncertaintyfrom‘Above’and‘Below’:
perspectivesfromIndia.RegEnvironChange2019,19:1533- 1547http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10113-019-01479-7.
4. CurryJA,WebsterPJ:Climatescienceandtheuncertainty monster.BullAmMeteorolSoc2011,92:1667-1682http://dx.doi.
org/10.1175/2011BAMS3139.1.
5. BarrosV,DaheQ,FieldC,QinDJ,DokkenKL,EbiMD,MachGK, PlattnerSK,AllenM,StockerTetal.:ManagingtheRisksof ExtremeEventsandDisasterstoAdvanceClimateChange Adaptation,ASpecialReportofWorkingGroupsIandIIofthe IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange(IPCC). NewYork:
CambridgeUniversityPress;2012.
6. BhaveAG,ConwayD,DessaiS,StainforthDA:Barriersand opportunitiesforrobustdecisionmakingapproachesto supportclimatechangeadaptationinthedevelopingworld.
ClimRiskManage2016,14:1-10http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
crm.2016.09.004.
7. WilbyRL,DessaiS:Robustadaptationtoclimatechange.
Weather2010,65:180-185http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wea.543.
8. SrivastavaS,MehtaL,BoseS:A‘NaturalDisaster’ontopofa pandemic–preparednessinthefaceofcascading
uncertainties.IDSOpinionPiece. Brighton:IDS;2020https://
www.ids.ac.uk/opinions/a-natural-disaster-on-top-of-a- pandemic-preparedness-in-the-face-of-cascading-uncertainties/
.
9. AchutaraoK:Uncertaintyfromabove:canitbereduced?Paper PresentedatWorkshoponClimateChangeandUncertaintyfrom AboveandBelow,NewDelhi,January20162016https://www.
slideshare.net/Stepscentre/
krishna-achutarao-uncertainty-from-above-can-it-be-reduced.
10. WynneB:Uncertaintyandenvironmentallearning:
reconceivingscienceandpolicyinthepreventiveparadigm.
GlobEnvironChange1992,2:111-127.
11. MehtaL,LeachM,NewellP,ScoonesI,SivaramakrishnanK, WayS-A:ExploringUnderstandingsofInstitutionsandUncertainty:
NewDirectionsinNaturalResourceManagement,IDSDiscussion Paper372. Brighton:IDS;1999.
12. FritzeJG,BlashkiGA,BurkeS,WisemanJ:Hope,despairand transformation:climatechangeandthepromotionofmental healthandwellbeing.IntJMentalHealthSyst2008,2:13http://
dx.doi.org/10.1186/1752-4458-2-13.
13. PenrodJ:Refinementoftheconceptofuncertainty.JAdv Nursing2001,34:238-245http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365- 2648.2001.01750.x.
14. DamodaranV,D’SouzaR:CommonwealthForestryand EnvironmentalHistory:Empire,ForestsandColonialEnvironments inAfrica,theCaribbeanandSouthAsiaandNewZealand. New Delhi:PrimusBooks;2020.
15. HerediaRC,RatnagarS:Mobile,andMarginalizedPeoples:
PerspectivesfromthePast. NewDelhi:Manohar;2003.
16. MukhopadhyayA:LivingwithDisasters:Communitiesand DevelopmentintheIndianSundarbans. NewDelhi:Cambridge UniversityPress;2016.
17. VanderSluijsJ:Uncertaintyasamonsterinthescience-policy interface:fourcopingstrategies.WaterSciTechnol2005, 52:87-92http://dx.doi.org/10.2166/wst.2005.0155.
18. ScoonesI,StirlingA:ThePoliticsofUncertainty:Challengesof Transformation. London:Routledge;2020.
19. LeachM,ScoonesI,StirlingA:DynamicSustainability’s:
Technology,Environment,SocialJustice.Oxon:Earthscan;2010.
20. WestleyF,OlssonP,FolkeC,Homer-DixonT,VredenburgH, LoorbachD,ThompsonJ,NilssonM,LambinE,SendzimirJ:
Tippingtowardsustainability:emergingpathwaysof transformation.AMBIOJHumEnviro2011,40:762-780http://dx.
doi.org/10.1007/s13280-011-0186-9.
21. O’BrienK:GlobalenvironmentalchangeIIfromadaptationto deliberatetransformation.ProgHumGeogr2012,36:667-676 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0309132511425767.
22. FeolaG:Societaltransformationinresponsetoglobal environmentalchange:areviewofemergingconcepts.Ambio 2014,44:376-390http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13280-014-0582-z.
23. TaylorM:ThePoliticalEcologyofClimateChangeAdaptation.
London:Routledge;2014.
24. PellingM:AdaptationtoClimateChange:FromResilienceto Transformation. London:Routledge;2011.
25. JacksonT:ProsperitywithoutGrowth:EconomicsforaFinite Planet. London:Earthscan;2009.
26. PellingM,O’BrienK,MatyasD:Adaptationandtransformation.
ClimChange2014,133:113-127http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
s10584-014-1303-0.
27. NightingaleA,EriksenS,TaylorM,ForsythT,PellingM, NewshamA,BoydE,BrownK,HarveyB,Jonesletal.:Beyond technicalfixes:climatesolutionsandthegreatderangement.
ClimDev2020,12:343-352http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
17565529.2019.1624495.
28. FewR,MorchainD,SpearD,MensahA,BendapudiR:
Transformation,adaptationanddevelopment:relating conceptstopractice.PalgraveCommun2017,3:17092http://dx.
doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2017.92.
29. ScoonesI,LeachM,NewellP:ThePoliticsofGreen Transformations. Oxon:Routledge;2015.
30. BlytheJ,SilverJ,EvansL,ArmitageD,BennettNJ,MooreML, MorrisonT,BrownK:Thedarksideoftransformation:latent risksincontemporarysustainabilitydiscourse.Antipode2018, 50:1206-1223http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/anti.12405.
31. Lotz-SisitkaH,AliM,MphepoG,ChavesM,MacintyreT, PesanayiT,WalsA,MukuteM,KronlidD,TranD:Co-designing researchontransgressivelearningintimesofclimatechange.
CurrOpinEnvironSustain2016,20:50-55http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.cosust.2016.04.004.
32. BennettEM,SolanM,BiggsR,McPhearsonT,NorstromA, OlssonP,PereiraL,PetersonG,Raudsepp-HearneC,BiermannF etal.:Brightspots:seedsofagoodanthropocene.FrontEcol Environ2016,14:441-448http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/fee.1309.
33. Godfrey-WoodR,NaessLO:Adaptingtoclimatechange:
transformingdevelopment? IDSBull2016,47:49-62http://dx.
doi.org/10.19088/1968-2016.131.
34. HarawayD:Anthropocene,capitalocene,plantationocene, chthulucene:makingkin.EnvironHumanit2015,1:159-165 http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/22011919-3615934.
35. BensonJK:Organizations:adialecticalview.AdmSciQ1977, 22:1-21http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2391741.
36. Myeong-GuS,CreedWED:Institutionalcontradictions,praxis, andinstitutionalchange:adialecticalperspective.Acad ManageRev2002,27:222-247http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/
4134353.
37. GramsciA:SelectionsfromthePrisonNotebooksofAntonio Gramsci. NewYork:InternationalPublishers;1971.
38. BourdieuP:OutlineofaTheoryofPractice. Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress;1977.
39. GiddensA:TheConstitutionofSociety:OutlineoftheTheoryof Structuration. Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress;1984.
40. FreireP:PedagogyoftheOppressed. London:Bloomsbury Publishing;2000.
41. ShoveE:BeyondtheABC:climatechangepolicyandtheories ofsocialchange.EnvironPlannA2010,42:1273-1285http://dx.
doi.org/10.1068/a42282.
42. KilminsterR:PraxisandMethod. London:Methuen;1979.
43. SenA:InequalityRe-examined. Oxford:ClarendonPress;1992.
44. SenA,NussbaumM,SenA:Capabilityandwellbeing.The QualityofLife. Oxford:ClarendonPress;1993.
45. SenA:DevelopmentasFreedom. Oxford:OxfordPaperbacks;
2001.
46. MarxK:Thesis11.ThesesonFeuerbach.1845https://www.
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/theses/theses.htm.
47. CohenI:StructurationTheory:AnthonyGiddensandthe ConstitutionofSocialLife.London:MacmillanInternationalHigher Education;1989.
48. TurnerJ:Thetheoryofstructuration.AmJSociol1986,91:969- 977.
49. BrownK,WestawayE:Agency,capacityandresilienceto environmentalchange:lessonsfromhumandevelopment, well-being,anddisasters.AnnuRevEnvironResour2011, 36:321-342http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-052610- 092905.
50. O’BrienK,SygnaL:Respondingtoclimatechange:‘thethree spheresoftransformation’.In PaperPresentedatProceedings
ofTransformationinaChangingClimateconference;Universityof Oslo,Norway:2013.
51. BurkeBJ,HeynenN:Transformingparticipatoryscienceinto socioecologicalpraxis:valuingmarginalizedenvironmental knowledgesinthefaceoftheneoliberalizationofnatureand science.EnvironSoc2014,5:7-27http://dx.doi.org/10.3167/
ares.2014.050102.
52.
TemperL,DelBeneD:Transformingknowledgecreationfor environmentalandepistemicjustice.CurrOpinEnvironSustain 2016,20:41-49http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2016.05.004.
53. AtwoodE,WilliamsonS:Plagueandprotestgohandinhand.
JstorDaily.2020.August19th2020,https://daily.jstor.org/plague- and-protest-go-hand-in-hand/.
