Title |
A discursive review of the textual use of ‘trapped’ in environmental migration studies: The conceptual birth and troubled teenage years of trapped populations
|
---|---|
Published in |
Ambio, February 2018
|
DOI | 10.1007/s13280-017-1007-6 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Sonja Ayeb-Karlsson, Christopher D. Smith, Dominic Kniveton |
Abstract |
First mooted in 2011, the concept of Trapped Populations referring to people unable to move from environmentally high-risk areas broadened the study of human responses to environmental change. While a seemingly straightforward concept, the underlying discourses around the reasons for being 'trapped', and the language describing the concept have profound influences on the way in which policy and practice approaches the needs of populations at risk from environmental stresses and shocks. In this article, we apply a Critical Discourse Analysis to the academic literature on the subject to reveal some of the assumptions implicit within discussing 'trapped' populations. The analysis reveals a dominant school of thought that assisted migration, relocation, and resettlement in the face of climate change are potentially effective adaptation strategies along a gradient of migrant agency and governance. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Germany | 5 | 16% |
United Kingdom | 5 | 16% |
France | 2 | 6% |
Brazil | 1 | 3% |
Puerto Rico | 1 | 3% |
Comoros | 1 | 3% |
Sweden | 1 | 3% |
United States | 1 | 3% |
Italy | 1 | 3% |
Other | 5 | 16% |
Unknown | 8 | 26% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 25 | 81% |
Scientists | 4 | 13% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 133 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 14% |
Student > Master | 19 | 14% |
Researcher | 15 | 11% |
Student > Bachelor | 11 | 8% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 6% |
Other | 22 | 17% |
Unknown | 39 | 29% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Social Sciences | 29 | 22% |
Environmental Science | 20 | 15% |
Engineering | 7 | 5% |
Arts and Humanities | 5 | 4% |
Unspecified | 4 | 3% |
Other | 19 | 14% |
Unknown | 49 | 37% |