Visuals of Hurricane Sandy

CUNY Institute for Sustainable Cities

A great institute we may decide to do work with in the future!

The CUNY Institute for Sustainable Cities (CISC) works to realize cities as part of the solution to global sustainability challenges. By merging the science of sustainability with innovative public programming, we examine opportunities available to cities—and their residents—for proactive responses to on-going environmental change. We harness the potential of formal and informal means to inspire a new generation of environmental thinkers. In doing so, we seek to understand and influence the evolution of the urban environment, while connecting the CUNY community, decision makers and the general public to these critical issues.

CISC explores the nature and complexity of cities through the following themes and questions:

Consumption: What are the elements, patterns, and impacts of urban consumption and how do they change over time?

Vulnerability and Resilience: How are cities impacted by global environmental change and what are their response capacities?

Ecosystem Services: What services do urban ecosystems provide to cities and how can their maintenance and restoration benefit urban areas?

City as Living Laboratory Talk with David Chapin, Cindi Katz, and Mary Miss

October 3, 2pm

The James Gallery
City as Living Laboratory
David Chapin, Cindi Katz, and Mary Miss
The Graduate Center, CUNY

Find more info here: with relevant lists and departments.
Mary Miss’s project City as Living Laboratory aims to establish Broadway as the “green corridor” of New York City.

Exploring the city as an urban ecosystem, with nature everywhere and in action at all times, it emphasizes the ways in which innumerable small decisions shape the environment we inhabit today, and exposes behavioral choices which have a decisive impact on our collective future.
Co-sponsored by Environmental Psychology, The Graduate Center, CUNY and Mary Miss/City as Living Laboratory (MM/CaLL)

Free and open to the public. All events take place at The Graduate Center, CUNY, 365 Fifth Ave btwn 34th & 35th. The building and the venues are fully accessible. For more information please visit or call 212.817.2005 or e-mail

The Beginning of Mapping as Evidence

In 185, physician John Snow set about tending to cholera victims in London. The epidemic continued to spread and spread. What could be done? Snow took the innovative approach to map the cases he found after noticing that some neighborhoods had a large amount of cases while some houses remained untouched. The infamous John Snow Map changed the future of geography, public health, and environmental design, when its findings showed that the culprit was a tainted well.

Published by C.F. Cheffins, Lith, Southhampton Buildings, London, England, 1854 in Snow, John. On the Mode of Communication of Cholera, 2nd Ed, John Churchill, New Burlington Street, London, England, 1855.


Copyrighting Your Work

Per the Creative Commons website:

The Creative Commons copyright licenses and tools forge a balance inside the traditional “all rights reserved” setting that copyright law creates. Our tools give everyone from individual creators to large companies and institutions a simple, standardized way to grant copyright permissions to their creative work. The combination of our tools and our users is a vast and growing digital commons, a pool of content that can be copied, distributed, edited, remixed, and built upon, all within the boundaries of copyright law.

How is our intellectual property sustainable through copyright? Where does copyright fail to sustain a just world?

Conference: Nature 2.0

Nature 2.0: Social Media, Online Activism and the cyberpolitics of Global Biodiversity Conservation
Paper Session and CfP for the annual AAG meetings, 9-13 April 2013, Los Angeles, USA
Organized by: Bram Büscher (ISS, Erasmus University, the Netherlands) and
                     Ingrid L. Nelson (ISS, Erasmus University, the Netherlands)
With much global biodiversity, ecosystems and natural landscapes in persistent rapid decline, conservation actors and concerned individuals and organisations are looking for novel ways to pursue conservation objectives. A major new frontier is the so-called ‘web 2.0’ and related social media. Web 2.0 applications like Wikipedia and YouTube and social media such as Facebook and Twitter allow people to create, rate and change online content and share these within cyberspace. These developments enable internet-users to now ‘co-create’ and co-produce the online activities, services, spaces and information they produce or consume, at least within the limits of possible action. Conservation actors are rapidly deploying new web 2.0 and social media techniques and facilities, allowing those who are concerned about global biodiversity and ecosystem decline to (seemingly) more directly engage with conservation activities in other parts of the world. The term ‘Nature 2.0’ aims to capture these dynamics and the natures to which they lead.
This paper session aims to inspire curiosity and encourage exchange among scholars from a wide range of perspectives regarding the concept (and practices) of Nature 2.0 and the way it changes the global political economy of conservation in our neoliberal times. We invite papers that critically interrogate how social media, web 2.0 applications and new forms of online activism change the politics and material/cultural forms and practices of global conservation and how they affect people and biodiversity in different spatial and temporal contexts. Of special interest are papers that connect spaces of online conservation consumption (through activism, images, videos, fundraising, etc) with offline spaces of conservation production (protected areas, biodiversity hotspots, wildlife corridors, etc) in/from different parts of the globe.
In sum, the paper session aims to address the following core questions:
          How can we conceptualize Nature 2.0 as a new space of enacting/practicing/experiencing global conservation and what new (or familiar) political conservation geographies follow from this?
          Does the concept of Nature 2.0 reflect an emerging political economy of global conservation and what roles do variously positioned conservation ‘producers’ and ‘consumers’ play in this?
          In what ways do web 2.0 technologies constrain and/or broaden the field of possible practices and discourses of conservation?
          What are the epistemological and methodological challenges of conducting Nature 2.0 research?
          How can we identify the relevant negative and productive aspects of power at work in the spaces/bodies/publics of and in relation to Nature 2.0?
          How have social media and web 2.0 changed online conservation activism and the cyberpolitics of global biodiversity conservation?
          What are some of the dominant Nature 2.0 on-line practices and how do they influence the work and activities of conservation producers and consumers?
          How do online and offline conservation spaces affect and involve each other, and how does that influence global, national and local politics of conservation?
          In which ways is Nature 2.0 characterized and influenced by broader changes in neoliberal capitalism, and which aspects of nature 2.0 are not sufficiently explained by these dynamics?
          How can race, gender, sexuality, class, emotion, and other concepts inform our understanding of Nature 2.0?
We request paper abstracts by Oct. 15th. Please send a 250 word abstract, with title, contact information, and three keywords as an attachment to and
Dr. Bram Büscher
Associate Professor of Environment and Sustainable Development
International Institute of Social Studies – Erasmus University

Kortenaerkade 12, 2518 AX The Hague, The Netherlands 

An Outline for a Social Science Research Paper

0) Abstract
1) Witty introduction
2) Introduction with arguments and summary findings
3) Theory / literature review
4) Literature review / theory
a. History
b. Main bodies of literature to respond to
5) Methods – how you got your data, how much of it, why that way
6) Analysis (if you include it) – what you did with your data
7) Findings – what I found
8) Discussion – use theory and literature to look at your findings
9) Conclusion – implications for policy, theory, and/or social change
x) references