1932

Abstract

What constitutes “human reproduction” is under negotiation as its biology, social nature, and cultural valences are increasingly perceived as bound up in environmental issues. This review maps the growing overlap between formerly rather separate domains of reproductive politics and environmental politics, examining three interrelated areas. The first is the emergence of an intersectional environmental reproductive justice framework in activism and environmental health science. The second is the biomedical delineation of the environment of reproduction and development as an object of growing research and intervention, as well as the marking off of early-life environments as an “exposed biology” consequential to the entire life span. Third is researchers’ critical engagement with the reproductive subject of environmental politics and the lived experience of reproduction in environmentally dystopic times. Efforts to rethink the intersections of reproductive and environmental politics are found throughout these three areas.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102218-011346
2019-10-21
2024-04-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/anthro/48/1/annurev-anthro-102218-011346.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102218-011346&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Aagaard KM, Segars JH. 2014. What is the microbiome and how do we study it. Semin. Reprod. Med. 32:3–4
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Agard-Jones V. 2013. Bodies in the system. Small Axe 17:182–92
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Almeling R, Waggoner MR. 2013. More and less than equal: how men factor in the reproductive equation. Gender Soc 27:6821–42
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Altman RG, Morello-Frosch R, Brody JG, Rudel R, Brown P, Averick M 2008. Pollution comes home and gets personal: women's experience of household chemical exposure. J. Health Soc. Behav. 49:4417–35
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Anker P. 2001. Imperial Ecology: Environmental Order in the British Empire, 1895–1945 Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  6. Asian Communities Reprod. Justice 2005. A new vision for advancing our movement for reproductive health, reproductive rights, and reproductive justice Rep., Asian Communities Reprod. Justice Oakland, CA: https://forwardtogether.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/ACRJ-A-New-Vision.pdf
  7. Auyero J, Swistun D. 2007. Confused because exposed: towards an ethnography of environmental suffering. Ethnography 8:2123–44
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Auyero J, Swistun DA. 2009. Flammable: Environmental Suffering in an Argentine Shantytown New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  9. Barker DJ, Osmond C. 1986. Infant mortality, childhood nutrition, and ischaemic heart disease in England and Wales. Lancet 327:1077–81
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Barker KK. 2005. The Fibromyalgia Story: Medical Authority and Women's Worlds of Pain Philadelphia, PA: Temple Univ. Press
  11. Benezra A. 2016. Datafying microbes: malnutrition at the intersection of genomics and global health. BioSocieties 11:3334–51
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Brown P, Morello-Frosch R, Zavestoski S 2012. Contested Illnesses: Citizens, Science, and Health Social Movements Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
  13. Brown P, Zavestoski S, McCormick S, Mayer B, Morello-Frosch R, Gasior Altman R 2004. Embodied health movements: new approaches to social movements in health. Sociol. Health Illn. 26:150–80
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Buklijas T. 2014. Food, growth and time: Elsie Widdowson's and Robert McCance's research into prenatal and early postnatal growth. Stud. Hist. Philos. Biol. Biomed. Sci. 47:267–77
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Bullard RD. 1993. Anatomy of environmental racism and the environmental justice movement. Confronting Environmental Racism: Voices from the Grassroots RD Bullard 15–39 Boston, MA: South End Press
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Butler C. 2017. A fruitless endeavor: confronting the heteronormativity of environmentalism. Routledge Handbook of Gender and Environment S MacGregor 270–84 Abingdon, UK: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Carson R. 1952. Silent Spring New York: Houghton Mifflin
  18. Catton WR Jr., Dunlap RE. 1978. Environmental sociology: a new paradigm. Am. Sociol. 13:Feb.41–49
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Clarke A, Haraway D. 2018. Making Kin Not Population: Reconceiving Generations Chicago: Prickly Paradigm Press
  20. Colborn T, Vom Saal F, Soto AM 1993. Developmental effects of endocrine-disrupting chemicals in wildlife and humans. Environ. Health Perspect. 101:5378–84
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Colom A. 2015. Forced motherhood in Guatemala: an analysis of the Thousand Days Initiative. Privatization and the New Medical Pluralism: Shifting Healthcare Landscapes in Maya Guatemala A Chary, P Rohloff 35–50 Lanham, MD: Lexington Books
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Cordner A. 2019. Toxic Safety: Flame Retardants, Chemical Controversies, and Environmental Health New York: Columbia Univ. Press
  23. Cortese R, Lu L, Yu Y, Ruden D, Claud EC 2016. Epigenome-microbiome crosstalk: a potential new paradigm influencing neonatal susceptibility to disease. Epigenetics 11:3205–15
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Crenshaw K. 1989. Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: a black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. Univ. Chicago Leg. Forum 1989:139–67
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Crenshaw K. 1991. Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Rev 43:1241–99
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Currie J, Zivin JG, Mullins J, Neidell M 2014. What do we know about short- and long-term effects of early-life exposure to pollution. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 6:217–47
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Daniels CR. 2006. Exposing Men: The Science and Politics of Male Reproduction New York: Oxford Univ. Press
  28. Davis D-A. 2019. Reproductive Injustice: Racism, Pregnancy, and Premature Birth New York: N. Y. Univ. Press
  29. Davis H, Todd Z. 2017. On the importance of a date, or, decolonizing the Anthropocene. ACME 16:4761–80
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Dewachi O. 2015. Blurred lines: warfare and health care. Med. Anthropol. Theory 2:295–101
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Di Chiro G. 2008. Living environmentalisms: coalition politics, social reproduction, and environmental justice. Environ. Politics 17:2276–98
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Di Renzo GC, Conry JA, Blake J, DeFrancesco MS, DeNicola N et al. 2015. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics opinion on reproductive health impacts of exposure to toxic environmental chemicals. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 131:3219–25
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Djoudi H, Locatelli B, Vaast C, Asher K, Brockhaus M, Basnett Sijapati B 2016. Beyond dichotomies: gender and intersecting inequalities in climate change studies. Ambio 45:3248–62
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Dove MR. 2006. Indigenous people and environmental politics. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 35:191–208
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Dow K. 2016a. Making a Good Life: An Ethnography of Nature, Ethics, and Reproduction Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. PressBrings reproductive and environmental ethics together in a study of perspectives in small town coastal Scotland about reproduction and the future of human and animal environments.
  36. Dow K. 2016b. What gets left behind for future generations? Reproduction and the environment in Spey Bay, Scotland. J. R. Anthropol. Inst. 22:3653–69
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Dow K, Lamoreaux J. 2019. Reproducing the environment. ReproSoc https://www.reprosoc.sociology.cam.ac.uk/projects/reproducing-the-envrionment
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Eskenazi B, Rosas LG, Marks AR, Bradman A, Harley K et al. 2008. Pesticide toxicity and the developing brain. Basic Clin. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 102:2228–36
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Fauci AS, Morens DM. 2016. Zika virus in the Americas—yet another arbovirus threat. New Engl. J. Med. 374:7601–4
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Fennell C. 2016. Are we all Flint. Limn 7: https://limn.it/articles/are-we-all-flint/
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Fortun K. 2009. Advocacy After Bhopal: Environmentalism, Disaster, New Global Orders Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  42. Fortun K. 2012. Ethnography in late industrialism. Cult. Anthropol. 27:3446–64
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Franasiak JM, Scott RT. 2015. Introduction: microbiome in human reproduction. Fertil. Steril. 104:61341–43
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Friese C, Marris C. 2014. Making de-extinction mundane. PLOS Biol 12:3e1001825
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Fuentes A, Porter N. 2018. Kinship. Critical Terms for Animal Studies L Gruen 182–96 Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Gaard G. 2010. Reproductive technology, or reproductive justice?: An ecofeminist, environmental justice perspective on the rhetoric of choice. Ethics Environ 15:2103–29
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Gallo MV, Ravenscroft J, Carpenter DO, Schell LM, Akwesasne Task Force on the Environment. 2018. Persistent organic pollutants as predictors of increased FSH:LH ratio in naturally cycling, reproductive age women. Environ. Res. 164:556–64
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Gammeltoft TM. 2014. Haunting Images: A Cultural Account of Selective Reproduction in Vietnam Berkeley: Univ. Calif. PressProvides an illuminating study of the intersections of reproductive technologies and environmental and cultural legacies of war.
  49. Gilbert SF. 2014. A holobiont birth narrative: the epigenetic transmission of the human microbiome. Front. Genet. 5:282
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Ginsburg F, Rapp R. 1991. The politics of reproduction. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 20:311–43This landmark review galvanized study of the politics of reproduction in anthropology in the early 1990s.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Goldman L, Falk H, Landrigan PJ, Balk SJ, Reigart JR, Etzel RA 2004. Environmental pediatrics and its impact on government health policy. Pediatrics 113:Suppl. 31146–57
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Graeter S. 2017. To revive an abundant life: Catholic science and neoextractivist politics in Peru's Mantaro Valley. Cult. Anthropol. 32:1117–48
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Haraway D. 2015. Anthropocene, Capitalocene, Plantationocene, Chthulucene: making kin. Environ. Humanit. 6:1159–65Offers a collection of controversy-confronting critical essays from Kim TallBear, Michelle Murphy, Yu-Ling Huang, Chia-Ling Wu, and Ruha Benjamin with a comprehensive introduction by Adele Clarke.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Heindel JJ, Balbus J, Birnbaum L, Brune-Drisse MN, Grandjean P et al. 2016. Developmental origins of health and disease: integrating environmental influences. Endocrinology 156:3416–21
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Hodgetts T, Grenyer R, Greenhough B, McLeod C, Dwyer A, Lorimer J 2018. The microbiome and its publics: a participatory approach for engaging publics with the microbiome and its implications for health and hygiene. EMBO Rep 19:6e45786
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Hoke MK, McDade T. 2014. Biosocial inheritance: a framework for the study of the intergenerational transmission of health disparities. Ann. Anthropol. Pract. 38:2187–213
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Hoover E. 2017. The River Is in Us: Fighting Toxics in a Mohawk Community Minneapolis: Univ. Minn. Press
  58. Hoover E. 2018. Environmental reproductive justice: intersections in an American Indian community impacted by environmental contamination. Environ. Sociol. 4:18–21Presents a definitive statement of the history, character and application of the environmental reproductive justice concept based in a Mohawk community ethnography.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Hoover E, Cook K, Plain R, Sanchez K, Waghiyi V et al. 2012. Indigenous peoples of North America: environmental exposures and reproductive justice. Environ. Health Perspect. 120:121645–49
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Ivry T. 2015. The pregnancy manifesto: notes on how to extract reproduction from the Petri dish. Med. Anthropol. 34:3274–89
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Jeffries Hein R. 2018. The effects of contemporary political economy on laboratory labor in the production of obesity knowledge and environmental biomedical subjecthood within the sciences of developmental origins of health and disease and epigenetics PhD Diss., Univ. Calif. Los Angel:.
  62. Johnson C. 2017. Pregnant woman versus mosquito: a feminist epidemiology of Zika virus. J. Int. Political Theory 13:2233–50
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Kaijser A, Kronsell A. 2014. Climate change through the lens of intersectionality. Environ. Politics 23:3417–33
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Kenney M, Müller R. 2017. Of rats and women: narratives of motherhood in environmental epigenetics. BioSocieties 12:123–46
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Kirksey SE, Helmreich S. 2010. The emergence of multispecies ethnography. Cult. Anthropol. 25:4545–76
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Kowal E, Warin M. 2018. Anthropology, indigeneity, and the epigenome. Am. Anthropol. 120:4822–25
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Kuehn L, McCormick S. 2017. Heat exposure and maternal health in the face of climate change. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 14:8e853
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Kuzawa C, Sweet E. 2009. Epigenetics and the embodiment of race: developmental origins of US racial disparities in cardiovascular health. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 21:12–15
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Lamoreaux J. 2016. What if the environment is a person? Lineages of epigenetic science in a toxic China. Cult. Anthropol. 31:2188–214
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Landecker H. 2011. Food as exposure: nutritional epigenetics and the new metabolism. BioSocieties 6:2167–94
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Landecker H, Panofsky A. 2013. From social structure to gene regulation, and back: a critical introduction to environmental epigenetics for sociology. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 39:333–57
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Landrigan PJ. 2016. Children's environmental health: a brief history. Acad. Pediatr. 16:11–9
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Langwick SA. 2018. A politics of habitability: plants, healing, and sovereignty in a toxic world. Cult. Anthropol. 33:3415–43
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Lappé M. 2016a. Epigenetics, media coverage, and parent responsibilities in the post-genomic era. Curr. Genet. Med. Rep. 4:392–97
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Lappé M. 2016b. The maternal body as environment in autism science. Soc. Stud. Sci. 46:5675–700
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Lappé M, Landecker H. 2015. How the genome got a life span. New Genet. Soc. 34:2152–76
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Lappé MD. 2014. Taking care: anticipation, extraction and the politics of temporality in autism science. BioSocieties 9:3304–28
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Larkin B. 2013. The politics and poetics of infrastructure. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 42:327–43
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Liboiron M. 2013. Modern waste as strategy. Lo Squaderno Explor. Space Soc. 29:9–12
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Liboiron M, Tironi M, Calvillo N 2018. Toxic politics: acting in a permanently polluted world. Soc. Stud. Sci. 48:3331–49
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Little PE. 1999. Environments and environmentalisms in anthropological research: facing a new millennium. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 28:253–84
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Lock M. 2018. Mutable environments and permeable human bodies. J. R. Anthropol. Inst. 24:3449–74
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Lorenzo R. 2016. At Standing Rock, environmental justice is reproductive justice. Rewire.News Sept. 20. https://rewire.news/article/2016/09/20/standing-rock-environmental-justice-reproductive-justice/
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Lubitow A. 2013. Collaborative frame construction in social movement campaigns: bisphenol-A (BPA) and scientist–activist mobilization. Soc. Mov. Stud. 12:4429–47
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Luna Z, Luker K. 2013. Reproductive justice. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 9:327–52
    [Google Scholar]
  86. MacGregor S. 2010. ‘Gender and climate change’: from impacts to discourses. J. Indian Ocean Reg. 6:2223–38
    [Google Scholar]
  87. MacKendrick N. 2014. More work for mother: chemical body burdens as a maternal responsibility. Gender Soc 28:5705–28
    [Google Scholar]
  88. MacKendrick N. 2018. Better Safe than Sorry: How Consumers Navigate Exposure to Everyday Toxics Oakland: Univ. Calif. Press
  89. MacKendrick N, Cairns K. 2019. The polluted child and maternal responsibility in the US environmental health movement. Signs: J. Women Cult. Soc. 44:2307–32
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Mandell R, Israel BA, Schulz AJ 2018. Breaking free from siloes: intersectionality as a collective action frame to address toxic exposures and reproductive health. Soc. Mov. Stud. 18:3346–63
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Mansfield B. 2017. Folded futurity: epigenetic plasticity, temporality, and new thresholds of fetal life. Sci. Cult. 26:3355–79
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Mansfield B, Guthman J. 2015. Epigenetic life: biological plasticity, abnormality, and new configurations of race and reproduction. Cult. Geogr. 22:13–20
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Masco J. 2004. Mutant ecologies: radioactive life in post-Cold War New Mexico. Cult. Anthropol. 19:4517–50
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Maxwell L. 2017. Queer/love/bird extinction: Rachel Carson's Silent Spring as a work of love. Political Theory 45:5682–704
    [Google Scholar]
  95. McCormick S, Brown P, Zavestoski S 2003. The personal is scientific, the scientific is political: the public paradigm of the environmental breast cancer movement. Sociol. Forum 18:4545–76
    [Google Scholar]
  96. McDade TW. 2012. Early environments and the ecology of inflammation. PNAS 109:Suppl. 217281–88
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Meloni M, Cromby J, Fitzgerald D, Lloyd S 2018. The Palgrave Handbook of Biology and Society London: Palgrave Macmillan UK
  98. Moran-Thomas A. 2019. Traveling With Sugar: Chronicles of a Global Epidemic Oakland: Univ. Calif. Press
  99. Morello-Frosch R, Pastor M, Sadd J 2001. Environmental justice and Southern California's “riskscape”: the distribution of air toxics exposures and health risks among diverse communities. Urban Aff. Rev. 36:4551–78
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Morello-Frosch R, Shenassa ED. 2006. The environmental “riskscape” and social inequality: implications for explaining maternal and child health disparities. Environ. Health Perspect. 114:81150–53
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Muller C, Sampson RJ, Winter AS 2018. Environmental inequality: the social causes and consequences of lead exposure. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 44:263–82
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Mulligan CJ. 2016. Early environments, stress, and the epigenetics of human health. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 45:233–49
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Murphy M. 2011. Distributed reproduction. Corpus MJ Casper, P Currah 21–38 New York: Palgrave Macmillan
    [Google Scholar]
  104. Murphy M. 2013. Distributed reproduction, chemical violence, and latency. Sch. Fem. Online 11:3). http://sfonline.barnard.edu/life-un-ltd-feminism-bioscience-race/distributed-reproduction-chemical-violence-and-latency/
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Murphy M. 2017a. Alterlife and decolonial chemical relations. Cult. Anthropol. 32:4494–503
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Murphy M. 2017b. The Economization of Life Durham, NC/London: Duke Univ. PressPresents a concise historical excavation of the economic logics of family planning and human capital in the twentieth century, refusing population as a term of environmental reproductive justice.
  107. Natl. Res. Counc 1993. Pesticides in the Diets of Infants and Children Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press
  108. Niewöhner J. 2011. Epigenetics: embedded bodies and the molecularisation of biography and milieu. BioSocieties 6:3279–98
    [Google Scholar]
  109. Pauly PJ. 1996. How did the effects of alcohol on reproduction become scientifically uninteresting. J. Hist. Biol. 29:1–28
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Pentecost M. 2018. The First Thousand Days: epigenetics in the age of global health. See Meloni et al. 2018 269–94
  111. Petryna A. 2002. Life Exposed: Biological Citizens after Chernobyl Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  112. Pollock A. 2016. Queering endocrine disruption. Object-Oriented Feminism K Behar 183–99 Minneapolis: Univ. Minn. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  113. Radin J. 2017. “Digital natives”: how medical and indigenous histories matter for big data. Osiris 32:143–64
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Reagan LJ. 2016. ‘My daughter was genetically drafted with me’: US–Vietnam War veterans, disabilities and gender. Gender Hist 28:3833–53
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Richardson CT. 2006. Environmental justice campaigns provide fertile ground for joint efforts with reproductive rights advocates. Guttmacher Policy Rev 9:114–17
    [Google Scholar]
  116. Richardson S. 2015. Maternal bodies in the postgenomic order: gender and the explanatory landscape of epigenetics. Postgenomics: Perspectives on Biology after the Genome S Richardson, H Stavens 210–31 Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Roberts EFS. 2015. Food is love: And so, what then. BioSocieties 10:2247–52
    [Google Scholar]
  118. Roberts EFS. 2016. When nature/culture implodes: feminist anthropology and biotechnology. Mapping Feminist Anthropology in the Twenty-First Century E Lewin, LM Silverstein 105–25 New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  119. Roberts EFS. 2017. What gets inside: violent entanglements and toxic boundaries in Mexico City. Cult. Anthropol. 32:4592–619
    [Google Scholar]
  120. Roberts EFS, Sanz C. 2018. Bioethnography: a how-to guide for the twenty-first century. See Meloni et al. 2018 749–75
  121. Ross LJ, Solinger R. 2017. Reproductive Justice: An Introduction Oakland, CA: Univ. Calif. Press
  122. Sasser JS. 2018. On Infertile Ground: Population Control and Women's Rights in the Era of Climate Change New York: N. Y. Univ. PressPresents a study of resurgent population control narratives linked to climate crisis in contemporary international development and the framing of women as “sexual stewards” of the environment.
  123. Sayre NF. 2012. The politics of the Anthropogenic. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 41:57–70
    [Google Scholar]
  124. Schiavenato S, Rapp R. 2018. Enduring innovation in reproduction. BioSocieties 13:2536–55
    [Google Scholar]
  125. Shapiro N, Zakariya N, Roberts J 2017. A wary alliance: from enumerating the environment to inviting apprehension. Engag. Sci. Technol. Soc. 3:575–602
    [Google Scholar]
  126. Sharp GC, Lawlor DA, Richardson SS 2018. It's the mother!: How assumptions about the causal primacy of maternal effects influence research on the developmental origins of health and disease. Soc. Sci. Med. 213:20–27
    [Google Scholar]
  127. Shostak S. 2013. Exposed Science: Genes, the Environment, and the Politics of Population Health Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
  128. Singer M. 2016. Anthropocentrism and the making of environmental health. Routledge Handbook of Environmental Anthropology H Kopnina, E Shoreman-Ouimet New York: Routledge. https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315768946.ch27
    [Google Scholar]
  129. Suryanarayanan S, Kleinman DL. 2016. Vanishing Bees: Science, Politics, and Honeybee Health New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press
  130. Sze J. 2006. Noxious New York: The Racial Politics of Urban Health and Environmental Justice Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  131. TallBear K. 2011. Why interspecies thinking needs indigenous standpoints. Hum. Is More than Hum. Ser. Fieldsights Nov. 18. https://culanth.org/fieldsights/why-interspecies-thinking-needs-indigenous-standpoints
    [Google Scholar]
  132. Taussig K-S, Hoeyer K, Helmreich S 2013. The anthropology of potentiality in biomedicine. Curr. Anthropol. 54:S7S3–14
    [Google Scholar]
  133. Taylor DE. 2000. The rise of the environmental justice paradigm: injustice framing and the social construction of environmental discourses. Am. Behav. Sci. 43:4508–80
    [Google Scholar]
  134. Terry G. 2009. No climate justice without gender justice: an overview of the issues. Gender Dev 17:15–18
    [Google Scholar]
  135. Thayer ZM, Non AL. 2015. Anthropology meets epigenetics: current and future directions. Am. Anthropol. 117:4722–35
    [Google Scholar]
  136. Valdez N. 2018. The redistribution of reproductive responsibility: on the epigenetics of “environment” in prenatal interventions. Med. Anthropol. Q. 32:3425–42
    [Google Scholar]
  137. Vineis P, Chan Q, Khan A 2011. Climate change impacts on water salinity and health. J. Epidemiol. Glob. Health. 1:15–10
    [Google Scholar]
  138. Voland E. 1998. Evolutionary ecology of human reproduction. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 27:347–74
    [Google Scholar]
  139. Waggoner MR. 2017. The Zero Trimester: Pre-Pregnancy Care and the Politics of Reproductive Risk Oakland: Univ. Calif. Press
  140. Wahlberg A. 2018. Good Quality: The Routinization of Sperm Banking in China Oakland: Univ. Calif. Press
  141. Warin M, Zivkovic T, Moore V, Davies M 2012. Mothers as smoking guns: fetal overnutrition and the reproduction of obesity. Fem. Psychol. 22:3360–75
    [Google Scholar]
  142. Washburn R. 2014. Measuring personal chemical exposures through biomonitoring: the experiences of research participants. Qual. Health Res. 24:3329–44
    [Google Scholar]
  143. WHO (World Health Organiz.) 2017. Don't Pollute My Future! The Impact of the Environment on Children's Health Geneva: WHO https://www.who.int/ceh/publications/don-t-pollute-my-future/en/
  144. Whyte KP. 2016. Is it colonial déjà vu? Indigenous peoples and climate injustice. Humanities for the Environment: Integrating Knowledge, Forging New Constellations of Practice J Adamson, M Davis 88–104 London/New York: Earthscan/Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  145. Wilson NJ, Inkster J. 2018. Respecting water: indigenous water governance, ontologies, and the politics of kinship on the ground. Environ. Plan. E Nat. Space. 1:4516–38
    [Google Scholar]
  146. Wylie S, Shapiro N, Liboiron M 2017. Making and doing politics through grassroots scientific research on the energy and petrochemical industries. Engag. Sci. Technol. Soc. 3:393–425
    [Google Scholar]
  147. Yates-Doerr E. 2015. The Weight of Obesity: Hunger and Global Health in Postwar Guatemala Oakland: Univ. Calif. Press
  148. Yates-Doerr E. 2019. Whose global, which health? Unsettling collaboration through careful equivocation. Am. Anthropol. 121:2297–310
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102218-011346
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error