Mineral development is a function of geology and can be at odds with the political geography of a region. Ore deposits can thus transcend political borders and boundaries and their development can thus challenge entrenched orthodoxies about border zones and security. From an environmental justice perspective, mines in border zones can also be areas where environmental harms defy the usual "race to the bottom." Unlike the stark differentiation of environmental harms that one sees in areas such as the Maquiladoras between the US and Mexico, the ecological impact of mines in border zones are defined by geology more so than by social strata. Nevertheless, there can be technical aspects of mine planning which can favor some communities and political jurisdictions over others. This paper will seek to question the geological determinism of mine planning in border zones by focusing on a few core cases of border mines, including the Pascua Lama project between Chile and Argentina; and a series of mines between Poland and the Czech Republic. The paper will consider how domestic politics influences mine planning on both sides of the border and the impact on regional cooperation and conflict.

This paper presents preliminary results of a project that explores environmental activism. Participants in two community groups were informally interviewed about their protest actions. A comparative case study demonstrates how different communities react to a common threat. Many of the essential elements of activism were evident in both locations. This was attributed to non-government organisations (NGOs) sharing key information on social activism. There was, however, a distinct difference in how some elements were implemented in each case location, and why others were omitted. One community focused on community building and non-violent direct action to pressure industry and influence government decisions. The other concentrated on scientific and evidence based reporting to influence government decisions, whilst also capitalising on the use of brand image and social license to operate against the resource company. Findings indicate that social movements that resist extractive industries are unique, even when they oppose a similar threat. The types of actions that become the focus of the movement’s efforts are influenced by the demographics of the community that is resisting. Further, place-based attachments and the emotional geographies of the individual actors drive willingness to participate, and dictate which actions become the movement’s foci.

Climate change scholarship identifies the potential efficacy of local responses for mitigation and adaptation (Hiteva and Sovacool, 2017). Attention is increasingly being given to the environmental justice dimensions of climate change (e.g. food, water & energy security, exposure to heat & flooding). Recognising that responses are mostly experimental (McGuirk et al., 2014), we sought to better understand the factors that enable (and constrain) social innovation for climate adaptation. We addressed socially and environmentally just (EJ) outcomes. Innovation, we observe, can be fraught. Business environments that enable innovation are often characterised by ‘failure tolerant’ leadership (Farson and Keys, 2002). Recent EJ scholarship implicates an over-reliance on regulation in failure to achieve EJ outcomes (Pulido et al., 2016). Cautiously attentive to contextual relevance, we report the initial findings from research examining local government responses to climate change adaptation in four Australian states. Findings point to common constraints (e.g. local politics, budgets and organisational culture), and to enablers (e.g. internal champions, peer-to-peer networks of knowledge exchange) and the reframing of adaptive responses as 'sustainability'. If local governments are ‘risk averse’ and innovation is driven by rapid failure, then organisational cultures promoting rapid experimentation (and failure) may be crucial for efficacious climate change response.

Qualitative research into Toolangi State Forest, Victoria, demonstrates that recognition justice is central to stakeholders’ perceptions and experiences of institutional decision-making in native forest management and use. Interviews with diverse stakeholders including conservationists, recreational users, scientists and Members of Parliament, reveal that, to various extents, they have been excluded from decision-making processes and maligned by other stakeholders, experienced variations in power, and had their values and knowledges (including traditional and connection to place) excluded. Effects of recognition injustice include polarisation of stakeholders, distrust in institutional decision-making processes and psychological harm, all interfering with successful, holistic decision-making. Environmental justice and intersectional feminism provide strong frames for recognition justice. Environmental justice argues that recognition is a form of justice in itself and can be distributed, for example, through inclusion in institutional decision-making processes. Intersectional feminism sees commonalities and divergences within and between groups, and that everyone has power and lack of power depending on embodied categories of difference and specific contexts. Applying environmental justice and intersectional feminist approaches provides insight into commonalities between diverse stakeholders’ perceptions and experiences in institutional decision-making; divergences, particularly beliefs about the connection between humans and nature; and power; and how they can be addressed for just decision-making.