Hampshire College

Ecological infrastructure such as wetlands is crucial for cities, particularly in the face of biodiversity crisis, environmental injustices, and climate impacts. However, their construction is often premised on erasing existing informal reciprocities and stewardship practices between urban nature and poor communities - leading to displacement of marginalised dwellers. It is therefore urgent to materialise visions of reparative wet infrastructure in cities with histories of exclusionary governance. Reparative infrastructure must be coproduced with informal dwellers who remain structurally marginalised in planning. But how can wetlands be coproduced in contexts where urban authorities are unwilling to recognise the epistemic authority of the urban poor? Scholarship on coproduction has rarely engaged the question of coproducing reparative urban ecologies with marginalised actors. Drawing from critical urban literature on insurgent planning and coproduction, and based on an ongoing research-to-action project with a collective of stewards facing eviction, we argue that reparative wetland infrastructure can be coproduced through three co-constitutive practices: respectful noticing of human-nature entanglements in informal settlements, centering dwellers in knowledge production, and teaching the state to co-create novel ecologies. We show that the justice outcomes of coproduction cannot be assumed - they must be actively produced through insurgent practices. Our argument advances debates on just sustainabilities and coproducing ecologies by situating these conversations in the global South, demonstrating that co-producing ecological infrastructure demands critical attention to existing urban commons, equitable stewardship relationships, and insurgent modes of participatory governance - offering lessons for sustainability planning and policy in rapidly urbanising contexts.

The attached syllabus is a prospective syllabus for an upper division course or graduate seminar on the philosophy of trans literatures.

Permanent tooth structures can respond to environmental disruptions even after the initiation of hard tissue deposition at the cusp tips, affecting dental morphology. In bioarcheological studies, linear enamel hypoplasia (LEH) provides evidence of both the presence and timing of developmental stressors that can occur during first molar odontogenesis. Yet, previous studies used LEH from the entirety of the anterior tooth surface to relate disruptions to changes in permanent tooth morphology, which could conflate causality by misrepresenting the timing of events. This study assessed associations between LEH formed during maxillary permanent first molar development and dental characteristics of these molars in contemporary humans with known health and nutritional histories from Tezonteopan, Mexico. LEH were observed in the field, and dental characteristics (crown size, principal cusp spacing, expression of cusp 5 and Carabelli trait) were observed on maxillary dental casts taken of the same adolescent study participants (n = 54). Statistical analyses included multivariate- and generalized linear models, and Principal Component Analyses. Slightly larger crown sizes, decreased buccolingual principal cusp spacing, and a slight decrease in cusp 5 expression were associated with the presence of LEH. The decrease in cusp spacing and decrease in cusp 5 expression follow expectations of the Patterning Cascade Model. Our results differ in some ways from those of previous studies possibly due to our focus on LEH defects forming during molar developmental periods. Our findings support the growing body of studies highlighting the unpredictability of molar morphology in the presence of developmental disruptions.

IntroductionThe English pronoun system is undergoing rapid change, with singular “they” increasingly used to refer to specific individuals. A key question is how this innovative usage is processed online, particularly when paired with gendered antecedents. The critical issue is whether singular “they” incurs processing costs similar to canonical gender mismatches or instead engages a distinct interpretive profile that avoids the neural signatures typically elicited by incongruent uses of “he” and “she”.MethodsWe addressed this question using event-related potentials (ERPs) in readers with high familiarity with singular “they”. Participants listened to sentences containing reflexive pronouns whose antecedents varied in gender specificity (gendered vs. non-gendered) and referential status (referential vs. bound-variable).ResultsAcross both the P600 (500–800 ms) and N400/Nref (300–500 ms) time windows, gender-incongruent reflexives elicited robust neural signatures of processing difficulty that depended on antecedent type. Referential mismatches with proper names (e.g., “John…herself”) produced frontal negativities consistent with referential integration difficulty, whereas bound-variable mismatches with quantified antecedents (e.g., “every woman…himself”) elicited large P600 effects characteristic of morphosyntactic repair. In contrast, singular “themselves” patterned differently from these gender mismatch responses in gendered antecedent contexts. In referential contexts, the N400/Nref response to singular “themselves” was intermediate between those for gender-congruent and gender-incongruent forms, consistent with a gradient of predictability. In bound-variable contexts, singular “themselves” patterned closely with gender-congruent reflexives, showing no evidence of a violation response.DiscussionThese findings suggest that, for speakers with substantial exposure, singular “themselves” does not behave like a canonical agreement mismatch, even in contexts that strongly penalize gender-incongruent forms. This pattern counters the intuition that gender-neutral reflexives necessarily impose a processing cost when paired with gendered antecedents.

Gross domestic product (GDP) remains the dominant measure of economic progress, despite long-standing critiques including its failure to account for environmental sustainability, inequality, and social well-being. In the context of escalating climate breakdown and rising inequality, GDP is increasingly being recognized as an inadequate metric for national prosperity. This article reviews the growing movement toward alternative measures that prioritize sustainability, inclusion, and the well-being of humans and the rest of nature. Hundreds of alternatives exist, but recent research shows significant similarity among them, forming the basis for building a broad consensus. This review explores how academics and policy makers are responding to the limitations of standard national accounts and highlights broad public support for expanding economic indicators. This review also identifies the key barriers to be overcome in order to move beyond GDP—including vested interests, institutional buy-in, and the fragmentation of alternatives—and suggests strategies to address each. By examining these barriers and evaluating potential solutions within the current political landscape, this review contributes to the discourse on how national accounting systems can better evolve to reflect the goals of a just and sustainable economy embedded in society and the rest of nature.