Your final paper should be between 2,000 and 3,000 words and discuss an independ
Your final paper should be between 2,000 and 3,000 words and discuss an independ
Your final paper should be between 2,000 and 3,000 words and discuss an independent topic of interest to you. It's okay if it's over 3,000 but it should NOT be under 2,000. You should have at least 5 scholarly sources NOT including readings from class. It's fine to use readings from class to support your argument, but you should do independent research as well. Scholarly sources can include books and peer-reviewed journal articles. You can supplement your scholarly sources with reputable news articles, podcasts, and documentaries but these don't count toward the 5 scholarly sources. Include a bibliography in whatever style you prefer. Your paper should show off how much you've learned about the field of environmental justice. Use the Walker textbook as a guide! Your paper should include 6 sections: - Introduction: In a few paragraphs, describe your topic, lay out the framework of your paper to come, lay out your main argument, and include an EJ claim that clarifies the environmental aspect, the social (in)justice element, and a sense of who is to blame and/or what should be done. What is the "normative justice claim" you are making? Is this how anyone would see it or does it challenge a different framework? - Context and background: In a few paragraphs, set the scene. What do we need to know about the people, place, issue, industry, or historical development in order to confront the issue? Lay out the who/what/when/where/why/how of the issue. What do we need to know about spatial and/or temporal scales? What kind of data/evidence is needed? What social categories are at play? Does this intersect with any other "tributaries" of the EJ movement? Is it local? Global? Contemporary? Historical? - EJ claims: In at least 3 paragraphs, lay out your research of the topic within an environmental justice framework. Build on the claims made in your introduction and support your perspective with what you've learned. Is this violence? Is it spectacular? Slow? Do other people see it this way? Specifically describe the issues of distributional, procedural, and recognition justice or injustice (at least two of the 3, see Walker ch. 4). Are there any issues in terms of evidence/data/science/knowledge/process? How does this issue look in terms of vulnerability, exposure, responsibility (see Walker ch. 5) - What does justice look like? Reframe the issue in terms of justice (either in the past and/or in the future). What could have/should have been changed? What would can/should be done? What does redemption/rebuilding/justice look like? Is there a difference between ideal theory and pragmatic policy? Is there a mobilization around this issue, and if so, what strategies are effective? Who is to blame? Who has the power to fix things? Where will change come from (top-down, bottom-up, gov't, grassroots, corporations, international community)? - Counter-arguments: A brief discussion of the counterpoints/non-EJ ways to understand this issue. What might someone say to argue with you? - A conclusion Include a conclusion that summarizes your main points and restates why this matters. Does this issue connect with any other issues? Does anything you've learned about EJ help you understand this topic or other topics in a new light?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Get 15% Discount When you Order Assignments From Us.