Abstract: Generated by the movement of waste materials from their point of origin or dispersal, a plumescape is an eco-social landscape resulting from the integration of waste materials into interconnected ecosystems and bodies, which hold or circulate those materials for varying periods of time. These contamination geographies may be produced, described, or altered by human technologies and behaviors, but they do not abide by socially constructed borders, timescales, or ideas about the purported separation of “nature” and “humanity” held by EuroAmerican societies. In the North American West, the production of plumescapes has proliferated since the mid-nineteenth century, illustrating a distinct cycle of environmental decision-making characteristic of settler colonial projects, a phenomenon I call the settler wasting cycle. Based on the survey and analysis of themes and patterns in archival materials, public testimonies, oral histories, and scientific studies, this study examines patterns in the histories of the Victoria, British Columbia sewage plumescape, the Tacoma, Washington ASARCO copper smelter plumescape, and the Hanford plutonium production plumescape, initiated in eastern Washington and spread widely around the larger region. The late establishment of EuroAmerican settler colonialism in this multinational region meant the production of these waste plumes coincided with new scientific understandings of disease, driving settler policy and infrastructural development designed to remove potentially dangerous wastes from proximity to white setter bodies. This dissertation charts the distinct stages and mechanisms responsible for perpetuating the settler wasting cycle, which fails to eliminate dangerous wastes from lived environments, but excels at creating vexed forgetting of the presence and danger posed by those wastes. This vexed forgetting relies on the production of scientific doubt about the health impacts of wastes, and the introduction of new technological and infrastructural strategies which promise (and inevitably fail) to diffuse or contain wastes. This study also traces counter-epistemologies developed from embodied knowledges and community networks, and the influence of those local ways of knowing on social movement organizing within and beyond the plumescapes which shaped them. This dissertation contributes to ongoing discussions in Discard Studies, Environmental History, and studies of the North American West.



Abstract: The Indigenous Peoples of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States have faced a shared history of disenfranchisement under settler-colonial paradigms. One consequence of this marginalization has been the widespread deprivation of secure access to safe drinking water in Indigenous communities. To date, much of the literature on Indigenous drinking water access has taken a deficit-based approach, focusing on the factors that are ‘lacking’ in Indigenous communities. Deficit based approaches have been criticized for perpetuating cycles of negative experiences, fostering dependency within the target community, and leading to interventions that are unsustainable and limited in scope. In contrast, this scoping review used a strengths-based investigation of successful Indigenous drinking water policy in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States. Through this review of the gray literature published from 2000 to 2024, we identified methods for measuring the success of Indigenous drinking water policies; common features of Indigenous drinking water policies that are said to be successful; and external factors which have been found to contribute to the success of Indigenous drinking water policies. The subsequent thematic analysis revealed a need to leverage the assets within Indigenous communities, drawing upon the strengths inherent to Indigenous knowledge systems and cultural practices, by involving Indigenous Peoples as key stakeholders in the development of drinking water policy. There is an opportunity for policymakers to engage in an iterative process that considers the larger problems we have identified in this review, as well as the community-specific concerns of the Indigenous groups being served.






Access the review article here.


Excerpt: Australia House was the first of London’s so-called Dominion Houses, those High Commission buildings that housed offices for the governments of Britain’s self-governing colonies, or ‘Dominions’, as they were known from 1907.1 These buildings opened in central London from 1918. To federationists of the New Imperial era, who held hopes of uniting a Greater Britain, these prominent semi-public government buildings materially expressed the empire (much like the Greenwich Meridian confirmed London’s central world position). More than the ‘nerves of empire’ (over 121,000 miles of submarine telegraph cable linking the Britannic world), these prominent buildings embodied the connectedness of a hoped-for ‘imperial commonwealth’ to London as ‘the “heart” of the imperial organism’.2 In the first quarter of the twentieth century, imperialists believed that the Dominions would be the key to maintaining British power. Thus, these ‘Empire Houses’ also became a key part of London’s transformation when it was ascendant as a self-consciously financial, imperial, and regal capital. Architectural landmarks occupying prime sites, designed by eminent architects , and characterised by a high order of finish, they invested London with an imperial character, even long after the term ‘British Dominions’ applied in the process of decolonisation. The Dominion houses reveal, as Alex Bremner has argued, how enmeshed were London-centric and Dominion conditions and experience.