Concluding Comments: …do I really have to come home?

Studying Abroad

I honestly can’t quite believe I’m writing my final blog post – this has been such a large part of my year abroad but, 15 posts later, here we are at the 16th and final one!

2017-2018 has honestly been one of my best years yet – I’ve lived abroad before (I was actually born in South Carolina and have since lived in Paris and the Netherlands), but being able to study at a foreign university gives you a truly unique experience. I’ve made clear in quite a few blog posts that I prefer geography teaching back at UCL, in terms of the examination styles in addition to the whole degree structure. Whilst you have a broad range of modules to choose from at UCLA, this tends to mean that all geography lectures are at a lower level, as lecturers can’t assume that all students have learnt certain topics and theories.

It’s also been interesting to study at a university with upper and lower division courses – whilst courses at UCL are carried out by year (Geog1001, 2001 and so on), courses at UCLA from 1-99 are lower division whilst 100+ are upper division (with upper division being harder). I’ve chosen to do a lot of upper division courses to ensure that this year actually means something for my learning – I think this has reflected well in my blog where I’ve had new topics to talk about, rather than choosing the easy options. Specifically, my favourite course so far has been UP232 (Disaster Risk and Reduction) – I’m so happy to have been selected for a graduate course and, in all seriousness, it’s a topic that I’m now considering as a post-graduate study option. From initially studying Geog2014 at UCL, being able to continue my learning of development geography from a different perspective at UCLA has opened new doors and showed me what I’m most interested in.

Blogging Abroad

One of the most interesting tasks I’ve had to do so far at UCL was write a reflective essay on my original essay in Geog2024 – it’s been one of the only opportunities at UCL where I’ve had to step back and truly look at the work I’ve completed. In this style, I’d like to briefly reflect on some of the main takeaways and reasonings behind the evolution of Colouring in Abroad. 

Initially, I found it slightly difficult to create a direction for the blog – as my wide variety of module choices out here has shown, I’m interested in studying a lot of different topics and drawing these all together in a single web page has been challenging. However, I’d say that the need for direction also challenged me to be more analytical in what I’m learning about on a weekly basis. Rather than just taking notes in class, blogging forces you to focus analytically upon what you’re presently learning and putting this into perspective with what you’ve learnt in the past – I’m constantly linking what I’m learning here at UCLA to UCL on a broad range of topics – from Malthusianism, terrorism, developmental perspectives of Brazil and so on.

I’m coming out of this year with a new-found respect for blogging – it’s not something I’ve ever had to do before (or even thought about doing) and it takes a huge amount of work – excluding this final post, my blog totals over 15,000 words and I’ve written more posts than necessary for the module (can I just use this entire website for my dissertation?!). I decided to structure my blog in a chronological order, using topics from modules that I was studying in Fall, Winter and Spring quarters – as time has passed, I have also been able to supplement blog posts with any information that is relevant from previous quarters. I think my blog has gained greater clarity and direction as time has gone by, and I hope this comes through to those reading as well. Making a blog has also been a new experience engaging with an online audience – embedding gifs, videos, hyperlinks and maps into my posts have all been very conscious efforts to make posts come to life in various ways (one of my pictures from the blog even made its way onto the UCL Study Abroad Instagram page – see below!).

Some posts are more independent than others – specifically regarding my social media and gerrymandering posts – but as I’ve researched issues that began as being mostly independent from my lecture content, I’ve found that these larger issues commonly relate back to content from both UCL and UCLA. I think that with blogging, there’s always more that could be said and each blog post that I’ve written tends to raise several more issues that I could write about! There’s therefore much more to potentially expand upon if I were to continue this blog in the future and I’m sad that the blog deadline finishes before my actual studies finish – I may write a few more posts just for a sense of fulfilment so I’ve got a memento of my entire academic year.

There’s obviously no right and wrong with personal blogging, but I’m intrigued as to how my year may have differed if my studies here had counted towards my overall degree. I’m really grateful that this year doesn’t count, as it’s meant I’ve chosen subjects purely because I enjoy them. This has given me more time, and more enthusiasm, in writing my academic blog posts. Although I’m excited to begin final year and continue with my dissertation, I’m heartbroken that this year has come to an end so quickly. Thank you to everyone who has made my time here so special – I don’t want to sound too much of a cliché but, socially and academically, it’s been one of the best years of my life.

 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Lessons from Easter Island: Perspectives beyond Malthusianism for present-day resource issues

One of the classic geography topics that we all have learnt from secondary school onwards is the concept of Malthusianism, with population growth expanding at a faster rate than means of subsistence, meaning only checks like disease, famine or war can prevent poverty (Malthus, 1798). Easter Island, a Chilean island in the southeast Pacific, is commonly used as an early example of unsustainable resource use. Jared Diamond, my Geog6 professor I spoke of within a prior post, has written several articles and books detailing the environmental causes of Polynesian demise within Easter Island, and he also uses the island’s experience as a metaphor for the current situation globally. I have similarly been introduced to Malthusianism and associated concepts within the UCL module Geog1004 (Human Ecology), within which Malthusianism is critiqued for not taking power relations and differential access to resources into account.

I’d therefore like to write a blog post moving forward from my prior introduction to Jared Diamond, firstly by discussing his work on Easter Island and then discussing the wider circumstances in which societies may fail, whereby environmental determinism cannot be the sole factor in societal collapse or success (Eades, 2011). As such a contentious topic, I feel that the Malthusianism debate presents some key differences in geographical teaching between UCL and UCLA, whereby the former has strongly critiqued the theory, yet the latter, in Diamond’s case, has strongly advanced Malthusian theory.

Malthusianism in Easter Island

In the case of Easter Island, its demise may be related to certain Malthusian concepts. Its early deforestation is largely a result of environmental fragility (Diamond, 2007), as Easter Island pollen analysis shows thick subtropical forests existing as far as 30,000 years prior to human arrival (Diamond, 1995). However, land clearance and burning for gardens alongside deforestation for canoes and erecting statues both are suggested to have been the key factors in the disappearance of Easter Island forest in the fifteenth century (Diamond, 1995). As suggested by Diamond and Geog6, this specific case study may thus appear to have exceeded its limits of sustainability (Boersema, 2015).

Easter Island ‘Moai’ Statues (Source: Sapiens, 2018)

Is Easter Island a metaphor for the world? 

However, whilst the early Polynesians on Easter Island may have experienced a Malthusian collapse, Geog1004 at UCL presents a more optimistic picture for present-day human society – specific criticisms I learnt in this UCL module included that Malthus (and Diamond) rely on science assumptions that technology and innovation cannot be improved, and also do not adequately consider the differential access to resources, rather than simply the amount. As Amartya Sen noted in 1991, it is often a lack of freedom which limits access to resources, such as gender inequity or economic poverty.

Diamond does make slight reference to the differences between Easter Island and modern-day society, notably: “unlike the Easter Islanders, we have histories of the past – information that can save us” (1995: 69). However, what is lacking in Geog6 at UCLA is recognition of the social and historical influences on population and resources, which in reality has little to do with ‘natural’ laws. Diamond thus underestimates human adaptability and the role of education and collective action in solving modern-day resource crises, instead turning solely to the environment as the determinant of all societal outcomes (Pakandam, 2009; Boersema, 2015). As introduced in Geog1004 at UCL, the key aspects of managing resource crises are direction, diversity and distribution (Leach et al., 2013). Food and water insecurity can be improved through economic and political policies (Brown & Funk, 2008). For example, Sub-Saharan Africa has substantial groundwater supplies, yet with 70% of land owned by small-scale farmers, there is little investment into irrigation and water infrastructure (MacDonald et al., 2012).

 

Diamond’s work is largely critiqued within academia as selling to the mass market with a declining engagement with actual scientific research – as Hayward (2006: 167) summarizes in a review, Diamond’s 2006 book Collapse gives ‘overly-simplistic summaries’ with ‘a lack of substantiation’. This is further seen in Boersema’s widely-acclaimed book, within which he critiques Diamond’s ‘use of exaggeration and catchphrases’ (2015: 183).

I am glad to have taken Geog6 at UCLA, and it has been interesting to hear about the case study of Easter Island from Professor Diamond, who is a renowned voice across Geography. However, aside from this specific Malthusian example, I believe Geog1004 at UCL to have given me a better understanding of the complexity of resource issues, regarding supply and varied access to resources by different communities.

---

Boersema, J.J. (2015) The Survival of Easter Island, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brown, M. & C. Funk (2008) ‘Food Security Under Climate Change’, Science, 319(5863): 580-581.

Diamond, J. (1995) ‘Easter’s End’, Discover, 16(8): 62-69.

Diamond, J. (2007) ‘Easter Island Revisited’, Science, 317: 1692-1694.

Eades, G.L. (2012) ‘Determining Environmental Determinism’, Progress in Human Geography, 36(3): 423-427.

Hayward, D. (2006) ‘Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Survive by J. Diamond’, Reviewed in: Island Studies Journal, 1(1): 165-167.

MacDonald, A.M., H.c. Bonsor, B.E.O. Dochartaigh & R.G. Taylor (2012) ‘Quantitative maps of groundwater resources in Africa’, Environmental Research Letters, 7: 1-7.

Malthus, T. (1798) An Essay on the Principle of Population, London: J. Johnson.

Pakandam, B. (2009) ‘Why Easter Island Collapsed: An Answer for an Enduring Question’, Economic History Working Papers 117/09, London: LSE Department of Economic History. 

Sen, A. (1991) Development as Freedom, New York: Oxford University Press.

Perceptions of Terrorism: Comm107 and Geog1007

The issue of contemporary terrorism is one that has touched many of us, as people who live in London, New York, Paris, and many other areas that have been targeted by terrorist attacks (Figure 1). The rise of organisations such as ISIS, al-Qaeda and the Taliban has presented a key political struggle for western nations, wherein Islam is often discussed as being antithetical to western democratic ideals (Hoffman, 2006). One course in my spring quarter, Comm107 (Terrorism in Journalism) introduced a historical perspective of terrorism, in addition to focusing on the role of the media and propaganda in facilitating new types of terrorism. Several aspects of this course have related to the geopolitical lectures in Geog1007 at UCL (Global Geographies), meaning I’d like to progress from this first-year module by comparing the geopolitical ideologies introduced within Geog1007 and Comm107.

Figure 1: Global Terrorist Attacks (Source: Global Terrorism Database (2016))

Definitions of Terrorism:

A first problem I’ve experienced whilst studying terrorism is the varying definitions given by different nations. Below are two differing definitions from MI5 in the UK and from Congress in the USA – the latter, given within my Comm107 class at UCLA, gives greater ambiguity and possible areas for abuse. For example, terrorism can be co-opted by the state for control, as seen in a recent article detailing Saudi Arabia’s new law to declare atheists as terrorists for not supporting Islamic religion (Withnall, 2014).

“Terrorist groups use violence and threats of violence to publicise their causes and as a means to achieve their goals. They often aim to influence or exert pressure on governments and government policies but reject democratic processes, or even democracy itself.”
(MI5, N/D)

“violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State”
(U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2331)

History of Terrorism:

My UCLA module gave a deeper historical understanding of the rise of terrorism across different time-periods, moving from the introduction of the word ‘terrorism’ by Edmund Burke during the French Revolution in 1795. The module also examines a range of Islamist, anarchist and left-wing revolutionary terrorism from different centuries to show the difficulties in racial profiling of terrorists (Crenshaw, 2006; Hoffman, 2006). Terrorism has been used for many different purposes, such as the FLN’s revolutionary aspirations that gave way to Algerian independence. Furthermore, the Comm107 module gave a history of the CIA, which offered weapons to the Mujihadeen during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the post-Cold War era (Townshend, 2011).

Geog1007 at UCL specifically examined the geopolitical and ideological background of terrorism in the aftermath of the Cold War and 9/11, wherein radical Islamism was seen as a global attack on freedom and democracy (Dodds, 2007). However, I believe that the deeper historical focus on terrorism given at UCLA presented a more comprehensive initial understanding of the world systems that have facilitated the spread of terrorism, in all its forms.

Ideologies of Terrorism:

The politicized nature of this issue was introduced within Geog1007 at UCL (Global Geographies), which discussed the War on Terror and how enemies of states are often placed into specific religious categories, even if the focus of attacks is more politically than religiously based (Sturm, 2006). Despite the Comm107 module at UCLA providing a more thorough historic overview of terrorism in general, I believe that UCL gave me a better understanding of 21st century Islamist terrorism and the role of western states. Within Geog1007, counterterrorism is shown to be strongly linked to religious and ideological aspects of communities (Perry & Negrin, 2011). Therefore, the role of our foreign policy decisions must be considered in the creation of disenfranchised and disempowered communities who turn to extreme forms of violence (Appadurai, 2006).

Whilst Comm107 focuses on the new methods of spreading propaganda through the internet and how self-radicalization is becoming a much greater issue than before, UCL clearly gave more reflexivity and also forced us to further consider our positionality as westerners, with our governments having historically been involved in aiding freedom fighters such as the Mujahideen which then gave rise to the Taliban. The below Ted Talk provides an interesting perspective regarding how groups such as al-Qaeda or Hezbollah embed themselves into local populations, often filling a gap left behind by a power vacuum in a failed state (as we’ve seen with the historic success of Jihadist Taliban in post-Soviet Afghanistan).

 

Summary:

The Terrorism in Journalism class is a fascinating class to have taken, in learning about media rhetoric and the historic evolution of terrorism over different centuries. When broadly considering terrorism, this UCLA module therefore gave a more comprehensive overview of the historic development and evolution of terrorist groups and activities across the world. However, in terms of a response to present-day Islamist terrorism, Geog1007 at UCL gave me a much more detailed awareness of east-west ideological conflicts following the Cold War. Geog1007 also gave a more in-depth perspective of minority communties following the War on Terror, and how political decisions shape their shift to using religious ideals in radical terrorism. A deeper understanding of Islamism and the Caliphate is necessary, alongside questions also being raised regarding western foreign policy response (Perry & Negrin, 2008). Therefore, whilst I appreciated learning of the issue from a historical perspective, UCL gave a better policy understanding of how to address present-day terrorism.

 

---

---

Appadurai, A. (2006) Fear of Small Numbers: An Essay on the Geography of Anger, Durham: Duke University Press.

Crenshaw, M. (2006) ‘Have Motivations for Terrorism Changed?’, in J. Victoroff (ed.) Tangled Roots: Social and Psychological Factors in the Genesis of Terrorism, Amsterdam: IOS Press.

Dodds, K. (2007) Geopolitics: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Global Terrorism Database (2016) ‘Data’ [online] (https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/).

Hoffman, B. (2006) Inside Terrorism, New York: Columbia Press.

MI5 (N/D) ‘Terrorism’ [online] (https://www.mi5.gov.uk/terrorism; accessed 2.3.18).

Perry, M. & H.E. Negrin (2011) The Theory and Practice of Islamic Terrorism, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Sturm, T. (2006) ‘Prophetic Eyes: The Theatricality of Mark Hitchcock’s Premillennial Geopolitcs’, Geopolitics, 11(2): 231-255.

Townshend, C. (2011) A Very Short Introduction to Terrorism, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Withnall, A. (2014) ‘Saudi Arabia declares all athiests are terrorists in new law to crack down on political dissidents’, The Independent [online] (https://www.independent.co.uk/; accessed 2.3.18).

Spring Quarter Modules

I feel like I’ve blinked and this year is nearly over – after a short spring break holiday to Arizona (I’ll put some pictures at the end of this post!), we’ve entered the final Spring quarter of modules. It’s a great opportunity for me to pick some modules which add a more nuanced depth to concepts which I’ve been introduced to at UCL.

Communications 107: Terrorism in Journalism

Taught by Nushin Arbabzadah, who fled with family from Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation, Comm107 presents the problems in defining and delineating historic and present terrorist events and groups. The course then progresses into studying the role of the media and technology in disseminating information and facilitating a new kind of terrorism, in which lone-wolf and self-radicalized attacks are the new norm (Hoffman, 2006), rather than hierarchical groups which train people in camps who then act at the orders of a specific individual (as was the case with the 9/11 airplane hijacking). For my dissertation on au pairs in Paris, several mentioned Parisian terrorist attacks as a disincentive to working in the French capital, so I’m interested in learning more about the theoretical basis of terrorism and how we, as a society, respond to attacks. Having learnt about the War on Terror in Geog2007 (Jason Dittmer’s teaching on geopolitics), I have a base understanding of the rise of Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda in the context of post-Cold War foreign relations, however I’d like a better understanding of the Caliphate and how to address Radical Islam and Middle Eastern politics.

 Mid-term: 65%, Final Paper: 35%

Geography 6: World Regions: Concepts and Contemporary Issues (Jared Diamond)

When I was reading about different universities at which to study abroad, I immediately recognised Jared Diamond’s name on the list of UCLA Geography lecturers. Due to the high demand for places on the course, you had to email an application to Professor Diamond detailing your background and why you’re interested in the course. Geog6 studies a different world region each week (ranging from Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, Japan, India and so on), with specific focus upon the historic factors influencing development within these areas. Diamond himself has published several books, and is a strong proponent of environmental determinism – as he writes in his book: “environment molds history” (Diamond, 1997). Whilst at UCL, we have been taught the fallacies of simply using environmental determinism to explain human outcomes (Eades, 2011). Diamond, specifically, is critiqued for his overly simplified arguments wherein certain environmental factors are highlighted ‘at the cost of others’ (Radcliffe et al., 2009). I hope that this course will therefore highlight some differences in UK and US Geography teaching.

Mid-term: 25%, Participation: 25%, Final Exam: 25%, Weekly Paper: 25%

Urban Planning 232: Disaster Management and Response (Steve Commins)

The final course I have chosen for spring quarter focuses upon the action of government and humanitarian organisations in responding to natural and manmade disasters. Through primarily focusing upon developing countries, UP232 highlights the lack of transparency of certain aid organisations and also will underline the role of individuals in responding to crises in their vicinity. The course is a postgraduate course for masters students, so I’m really excited to experience a new level of teaching compared to what I’ve experienced so far at UCLA. The lecturer, Professor Commins, has worked with the World Bank and several of my classmates have experience working in government departments or within private sector energy companies. Geog2014 (Development Geography) was one of my favourite modules in UCL, so I’m looking forward to furthering my understanding of development organisations.

Final Paper: 100%

The course is graded solely on a 20 page final paper, which I have chosen to write upon women’s agency and gender based violence following the 2010 Haiti earthquake. Recovery efforts have been slow, with a continued lack of transparency on the part of aid organisations – specifically, the recent Oxfam Great Britain scandal in Haiti alongside the cholera epidemic introduced by UN peacekeepers into Haiti, whereby over 8,500 died and over 500,000 people were affected yet UN immunity prevents any legal accountability (Porter, 2018; Pillinger et al., 2016). Tatiana Thieme introduced me to Disaster Capitalism by Antony Loewenstein in second year, and I’m hoping that my essay will serve as a specific case study of how organisations have profited from the Haitian disaster, even as locals continue to lack jobs and resources eight years after the earthquake struck. I’ve put an interview with Loewenstein that I watched in second year below:

 

---

Diamond, J. (1997) Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies, New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

Eades, G.L. (2012) ‘Determining Environmental Determinism’, Progress in Human Geography, 36(3): 423-427.

Hoffman, B. (2006) Inside Terrorism, New York: Columbia Press.

Porter, C. (2018) ‘Haiti Suspends Oxfam Great Britain After Sex Scandal’, New York Times [online] (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/22/world/americas/haiti-suspends-oxfam.html; accessed 4.8.18).

Pillinger, M., I. Hurd & M.N. Barnett (2016) ‘How to Get Away with Cholera: The UN, Haiti, and International Law’, Perspectives on Politics, 14(1): 70-86.

Radcliffe, S.A. (2010) ‘Environmentalist thinking and/in geography’, Progress in Human Geography, 34(1): 98-116.

 

Spring Break Bonus Slideshow!

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

‘City of Quartz’: Assessing Davis’ reflections of LA

Mike Davis’ book ‘City of Quartz’ is one of the most well-known reflections of Los Angeles’ development. Davis’ concept of fortification involves a view of LA as becoming increasingly physically segregated between private, securitised spaces and deteriorating public infrastructures (Davis, 1990). Reviews of the book critique the conception of public space transformed into fortresses (Nelson 1991). Davis is also critiqued for his views of racial tensions and the supposed ‘reassertion of white, homeowner and gentrifier social privilege’  without understanding the sociocultural improvements recently seen in urban areas (Peel, 1994: 171).

Davis was first introduced to me within Geog2023 at UCL (urban geography), when Alan Latham critiqued Davis’ view of fortification. Having spent over eight months living in LA, and having been taught about urban segregation in Geog2023 at UCL and Geog151 at UCLA, I thought it would be interesting to discuss the relevance of Davis’ views to the present-day urban area of LA.

Fortress LA? 

Through studying patterns of urbanization, segregation and fortification, Davis presents a view of LA as a city rife with social polarization, over-development and infrastructural issues (Horton, 1991). Urban planning within LA has historically been tied to ‘promoting growth and facilitating capital accumulation’ and, resultingly, the city has experienced high levels of urban segregation and wealth inequities (Linovski, 2018: 123). The negative views Davis holds towards LA’s fortification could therefore be partly applicable to historic areas of LA, whereby the housing crisis has pushed low income residents out of certain areas like Hollywood and Westwood (as discussed in a previous article).

The most important aspect of Geog151 regarding this segregation was discussion of social mix policies used within the US. Specifically, Allport’s (1954) Contact Hypothesis, which seeks to understand the common goals of different communities and enable consensus to be achieved in urban areas. To understand Allport’s hypothesis in real life, we had to spend several hours on a bus documenting passenger interactions – whilst most passengers did not speak with one another, people were willing to help others looking for directions or sit with strangers if necessary. Furthermore, there were many different ethnicities on the bus and people of varying ages, meaning this fieldwork corresponded more to a ‘dynamic mingling’ of strangers than a segregated and silent transport route (Amin, 2008: 7).

A Right to the City?

Whilst Geog151 gave us the opportunity to conduct empirical research to understand LA’s segregation, I feel that the course content of Geog2023 at UCL gave me a more comprehensive overview of the counterargument to supposed ‘fortification’. Specifically, the ‘Contested and Participatory Cities’ lecture involved discussions of the ‘right to the city’, as per Harvey’s (2008) viewpoint that citizens should demand an opportunity to change and improve the city for themselves. Another viewpoint was of Young (2001), who suggests that urban planners should engage in discussion with communities and activists to ensure democratic urban management and development.

Required readings at UCLA have further critiqued Davis’ view of white homeowner privilege. Latino urbanism is a key aspect of LA’s development, with Latinos projected to account for 1/4 of US population by 2050 (Talen, 2012). Roja’s (1993) analysis of East Los Angeles has shown a strong and vibrant Mexican community that has successfully mingled with Americans to provide a heterogeneous landscape with many forms of cultural expression, such as murals and graffiti. I feel that this was also seen along Melrose Avenue within my previous blog post, where I saw feminist and anti-Trump murals in a very popular place that is by no means a peripheral area.

Figure 1: Latino Mural in East LA (Mural Conservancy, 2012)

Geog151 at UCLA gave a really interesting opportunity to conduct empirical fieldwork regarding fortification and urban segregation in Los Angeles, with my research showing that the situation Davis has historically presented may not be entirely accurate in present-day LA. Furthermore, Geog151 taught me new sociology theories through which to improve social interaction, notably Allport’s Contact Hypothesis.

UCLA gave the opportunity to learn of Latino urbanism and to gain a firsthand understanding of segregation in LA through fieldwork. However, I believe that UCL has taught a more comprehensive overview of urban geography in Geog2023, notably regarding key thinkers such as David Harvey or Iris Marion Young. If not for my pre-existing understanding of key urban theorists, I feel that I would not have understood the wider context regarding criticism of Davis’ urban fortification.

 

---

 

Amin, A. (2008) ‘Collective Culture and Urban Public Space’, City, 12(1): 5-24.

Davis, M. (1990) City of Quartz: Excavating the Future in Los Angeles’, London: Verso.

Harvey, D. (2008) ‘Right to the City’, New Left Review, 53: 23-42.

Horton, J. (1991) ‘City of Quartz: Excavating the Future in Los Angeles by Mike Davis’, Reviewed in: Contemporary Sociology, 20(6): 910-911.

Linovski, O. (2018) ‘Designing for Development: Growth and the Practice of Urban Design in Los Angeles’, Journal of Planning History, 17(2): 118-143.

Mural Conservancy (2012) ‘Mural Conservancy of Los Angeles’ [online] (http://www.muralconservancy.org/press/east-meets-west-nuyorican-tours-east-la; accessed 12.1.18).

Nelson, B. (1991) ‘If This is Hell, Why is it So Popular?’, The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/1991/03/03/books/if-this-is-hell-why-is-it-so-popular.html; accessed 10.1.18).

Peel, M. (1994) ‘City of Quartz: Excavating the Future in Los Angeles by Mike Davis’ Reviewed in: Thesis Eleven, 37(1): 170-172.

Rojas, J.T. (1993) ‘Los Angeles – The Enacted Environment of East Los Angeles’, Places, 8(3): 42-53.

Talen, E. (2012) ‘Latino Urbanism: defining a cultural urban form’, Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 5(2-3): 101-110.

Young, I.M. (2001) ‘Activist Challenges to Deliberative Democracy’, Political Theory, 29(5): 670-690.

GeogM128: Conceptions of Brazil and Sao Paolo from UCLA and UCL

Brazil is an extremely important country, as the fifth largest country in the world and also as an emerging economic hub. Alongside this, it’s a site of substantial inequality and segregation. Caldeira’s (2000) work within São Paolo was a seminal aspect of Geog2023 at UCL and within this module I wrote a 3000-word essay furthering her discussions of vertical urbanism and segregation. It was one of the most interesting projects I’ve ever done and I received an 88 for the coursework, which has made São Paolo a very memorable topic.

This quarter, I was therefore pleasantly surprised to have a lecture on Brazil’s development within GeogM128 (Development and Environment). I’m not saying by any means that I’m an expert on Brazil, but I love learning about the country and I think the differences between what is taught at UCL and UCLA are highly relevant when discussing variations in geography teaching between the two universities. The focus of my original essay at UCL was verticality, so I’d like to move away from this by considering the differing perspectives towards  Brazil and São Paolo between UCL’s modules (Geog2023 Urban Geography and Geog2014 Development Geography) and UCLA’s GeogM128 module.

São Paolo’s urbanisation: a city of concentric circles?

At UCLA, the GeogM128 course portrayed São Paolo as a city of concentric circles, with the wealthiest being concentrated in the economic center and the poor located towards the outskirts of the city. However, UCL’s Geog2023 urban geography module and associated readings suggested that the city’s historic development led to a more complex pattern of urbanisation. I have taken a short, two sentence excerpt from my original essay to further explain this concept:

The city and its policy-making decisions have resulted in a nuanced form of segregation, whereby the model of concentric circles containing different social classes does not apply (UN-HABITAT 2010). Instead, historical infrastructural development has led to the creation of wealthy, gated neighbourhoods adjacent to, or within, ‘poor’ and peripheral zones (Caldeira 2000).

In this way, it is common to find luxury skyscraper apartment blocks in the same neighbourhoods as poorer communities – São Paolo has since become known as the ‘helicopter capital’ of the world, due to wealthy residents navigating the city by air to avoid the realities of living near poorer communities (Cwerner, 2009). I believe that the urbanisation of São Paolo introduced at UCL was much more detailed and truthful than the simple concentric circle explanation offered by GeogM128 at UCLA.

Development of Brazil and São Paolo: new perspectives

One of the biggest differences between UCL and UCLA’s approach to Brazil was the development content of the course – the UCLA module introduced several new wider theories in the context of Brazil and thus approached the nation from a development perspective. The two main theories regarding Brazil’s development were Perlman’s  (1980) ‘myth of marginality’ and Wallerstein’s (2004) ‘World Systems Theory’.

Perlman’s theory involves the heavy reliance of the wealthy upon peripheral, low-income communities in terms of these communities providing labour and services, whilst these low-income communities are largely ignored within national development agendas (figure 1 shows São Paolo’s Paraisopolis favela, with many residents providing menial labour for much of São Paolo). Wallerstein’s World Systems Theory posits that three types of countries exist: core nations, semi-periphery and periphery nations which rely on the core for development and also are relied upon for primary resources. GeogM128 suggests that this theory is also relevant on an urban scale, wherein the wealthy core relies upon the periphery in a similar way to the myth of marginality.

These theories appear to correspond to development theories within Geog2014 at UCL, where the ‘dependency theory’ was introduced to exemplify how resources in Latin American countries such as Brazil were historically exploited by European colonialism (Frank, 1967).

Figure 1: Paraisópolis favela (Caldeira, 2000)

The UCLA module analysed São Paolo from a more in-depth developmental perspective and went beyond the introduction to the city’s urbanisation that was taught within Geog2023 at UCL. However, I feel that certain perspectives introduced within GeogM128 are similar to Geog2014 at UCL, which offered a much broader perspective of development than the specific focus of UCLA’s module.

I’m glad to have taken this UCLA class, as it has furthered my understanding of some aspects of Brazil’s development. However, I feel that if not for UCL’s introduction to São Paolo in second year, I would not have known that the city’s development showed much greater complexity than the simple patterns described at UCLA.

 

---

Caldeira, T. (2000) City of Walls: Crime, Segregation and Citizenship in Sao Paolo, Berkeley: University Of California Press.

Cwerner, S. (2009) ‘Helipads, heliports and urban air space: Governing the contested
infrastructure of helicopter travel’, in S. Cwerner, S. Kesselring & J. Urry (eds)  Aeromobilities, Abingdon: Routledge, 225-246.

Frank, A.G. (1967) Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America: Historical Studies of Chile and Brazil, New York: Monthly Review Press.

Perlman, J. (1980) Myth of Marginality: Urban Poverty and Politics in Rio de Janeiro, Berkeley: University of California Press.

Wallerstein (2004) World-Systems Analysis: An Introduction, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

New York versus Los Angeles

Spending a year abroad has given us all an incredible opportunity to explore new places and experience new things, whether on campus or whilst travelling. As expected when looking at any urban area, there are significant variations between LA and other cities. With my brother now living in Manhattan, the free accommodation lured me in for a weekend visit to surprise my parents who were visiting. I think the visible differences I saw in urban development between LA and New York merits a comparative analysis of the cities. I’d like to discuss the differences in public transport and development of these areas, largely using material introduced from Geog2023 at UCL and Geog151 at UCLA.

Transport:

I’ve mentioned in a previous blog post about studying LA’s bus routes within my Geog151: Cities and Social Difference module. I first heard about LA’s infrastructural issues within the first lecture of UCL’s Geog2023: Urban Geography module. The creation of LA’s historic freeways destroyed the tram system, despite the fact that this system at one time meant LA had the best public transportation system in the country (Marshall, 2016). It was suggested that the replacement of trolleys with diesel coaches was highly inefficient, leading to the demise of public transportation networks and giving rise to the present-day conception of LA as a ‘car city’ (Bottles, 1987). Between 2015 and 2016, bus transport ridership dropped by over 2 million people and LA remains a city highly reliant upon private cars (Aron, 2017). Public transport is always one of the main things I miss about London. My lecturers at UCLA, whether American or international, unilaterally criticize LA’s situation and I’d have to agree – London has over 9,300 buses on 675 routes throughout the city, with new investments being made into clean fuel and night bus services (TFL, 2017). I’d say that LA’s reliance on cars means that walking about is also much less common compared to back home, despite LA having an amazing climate compared to New York or home (as I’m writing this, my brother has just texted to say New York has 24 hours of snow forecast and I’m being barraged with photos of the snowy UK from friends at home).

In comparison, New York’s public transport ridership levels are greatly improved, meaning there is a much lower reliance upon private cars and a much more extensive network of buses and subways. For example, New York’s M15 bus is the busiest route in the country, carrying 60,000 a day and arriving every 90 seconds during New York’s rush hour (The Economist, 2007). It was refreshing to get to visit New York and use the subway, rather than being stuck in a 2.5 hour LA traffic jam for what is usually a half hour journey (lesson learned: never drive in rush hour). Over the course of my trip, I was able to visit many different parts of the city without having to rely on a friend’s car or a ride-sharing service. I had to research London’s public transport and cycling systems within Geog2003 at UCL and I’d say that New York felt a lot more like London than LA does throughout the time I visited. As much as I love LA, it is a vastly different city – the hustle and bustle of New York life made it feel more like home, compared to the quiet sidewalks and empty buses of LA.

Development: Sprawl vs. Skyscrapers

I’d like to suggest that LA is a good example of Glaeser’s ‘splintering urbanism’ theory that was introduced in Geog2023 back at UCL. Splintering urbanism was initially introduced to me by Dr. Harris at UCL in my Urban Geography (Geog2023) class whilst discussing the introduction of Mumbai’s skywalks as a way to vertically segregate the rich from the poor (Harris, 2015). My classes at UCLA present a perspective of horizontal splintering, where the massive sprawl of LA’s development alongside the poor public transport earlier mentioned has significantly reduced access to other parts of the city (Bissell, 2010).

The development of New York has also seen a form of segregation, however I’d suggest that this has mainly been in the form of skyscrapers and expensive condo buildings that has made the city too expensive for many original residents or jobseekers. My brother happens to be staying with a friend in New York whose one-bed apartment in Midtown West is an extortionate $5000 a month. However, many young professionals now live in areas such as Brookyn or Hoboken, where if public transport is stopped, people are cut off from the city by either the East or Hudson rivers. These problems were again introduced in Geog2023 through ‘financification’, whereby New York’s historic development from the 1970s into the financial sector has gentrified Manhattan and displaced disadvantaged communities into these areas surrounding Manhattan  (Lees, 2000; Cameron & Coaffee, 2005; Glaeser, 2011).

The inaffordability of cities is by no means limited to LA or New York, and has been a common issue raised in teaching both at UCLA and at UCL. I’d say this issue and wider urban politics is a common theme of geographical teaching, however there are different angles from which this issue has been approached. I’d say that UCL has used a more theoretical basis, such as being taught Harvey’s (2008) conception of a ‘right to the city’ or Merrifield’s (2011) suggestion of an ‘encounter in the city’ to broaden Harvey’s initial idea. These ideas can then be applied and critiqued in the context of individual further research. However, the more surface-level teaching at UCLA has taught more from a case-study basis to show students how these issues play out in real life.

 

I love LA. I love the beaches, the sunshine, the people. However, as much as I love it, the lack of mobility over such a sprawling area drives me insane. I’m not saying it should be more like New York (which does have its own flaws of gentrification and social exclusion), however I would say that implementing a more extensive and well-planned  transportation network into LA would make it more representative of a 21st century city.

 

---

 

Aron, H. (2017) ‘Public Transit in L.A. Is Growing in Leaps and Bounds – but Where Are the Riders?’, L.A. Weekly [online] (http://www.laweekly.com/news/public-transit-in-la-is-growing-in-leaps-and-bounds-but-where-are-the-riders-7784449; accessed
10.24.17).

Bissell, D. (2010) ‘Passenger Mobilities: affective atmospheres and the sociality of public transport’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 28: 270-289.

Bottles, S.L. (1987) Los Angeles and the Automobile: The Making of the Modern City, Berkeley: University of California Press.

Cameron, S. & J. Coaffee (2005) ‘Art, Gentrification and Regeneration: From Artist as Pioneer to Public Arts’, European Journal of Housing Policy, 5(1): 39-58.

Glaeser, E. (2011) The Triumph of the City, New York: Penguin.

Harris, A. (2015) ‘Vertical urbanisms: opening up geographies of the three-dimensional city’, Progress in Human Geography, 39(5): 601-620.

Lees, L. (2000) ‘A reappraisal of gentrification: towards a ‘geography of gentrification’, Progress in Human Geography, 24(3): 389-408.

Marshall, C. (2016) ‘Stories of Cities #29’, The Guardian [online] (https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/apr/25/story-cities-los-angeles-great-american-streetcar-scandal; accessed 20.1.18).

TFL (2017) ‘Annual Report’ [online] (http://content.tfl.gov.uk/tfl-annual-report-and-statement-of-accounts-2016-17.pdf; accessed 20.1.18).

The Economist (2007) ‘Tunnel Vision’ [online] (https://www.economist.com/node/9047239; accessed 20.1.18).

Geography, Grades and GPAs within UCL and UCLA

Majoring in Geography is a lot more uncommon at UCLA than at UCL (I’ve had so many comments along the lines of “you do Geography? I didn’t even know that was a major!”). This means that a lot of people who study my Geography modules are doing so to fulfill their GPA requirements for another subject. Figures from the US National Center for Education Statistics show that, of all American freshman entering universities, only 18.7% completed “a rigorous curriculum” in high school, meaning general modules are enforced in university to improve skills that are more commonly learnt in secondary school in the UK, such as languages or maths (Weko, 2004). In general, more people at UCLA study geography courses ‘on the side’ to fill a GE (General Education) requirement, and there’s not as cohesive a group of geography students as I would have back home, where UCL geographers all study (bar one or two modules) the exact same course content.

A problem of needing to study Geography, or any other course, to simply fulfill a GPA requirement is that picking courses ends up being a game of which one can give you the highest grade for the lowest work for a lot of American students. Sites like Bruinwalk give you course details and reviews, with charts that show you what grades the lecturer gives on average to previous classes (I’ve put in a hyperlink to my Geog113 module on bruinwalk). UCLA is a highly competitive university, meaning this creates a situation where people don’t pick courses by interest but instead by what will give them the highest grades.

A major difference in teaching styles between UCL and UCLA has been the grading metrics (figure 2). Coming from a system where a 70+ is a first and the highest I’ve ever achieved was an 88, it’s slightly strange to now have a system where an A+ is normally from 90-100% (and if professors offer additional credit, you can get over 100% in some exams which still doesn’t make a lot of sense!). A lot of my friends dislike the UK university system for being practically impossible to reach 100%, however, I’d say that having a US marking system ends up making the top grades too achievable – obtaining a 90% in a module becomes slightly arbitrary when 200 other people can also get this grade. At UCL, I feel more proud when I receive a first for my essays because I’ve worked very hard to earn them, whereas I’d say it’s easier to receive high marks in my modules at UCLA.

Figure 2: Grade Conversions (SOAS, n/d)

As I’ve mentioned several times throughout my blog posts, I’d say that the geography teaching here at UCLA gives a base understanding of the issues in a ‘quantity over quality’ sort of direction. It fits the geography stereotypes a lot more, in terms of learning where countries are on maps, or simply having multiple choice or short-answer exams. However, I’d like to see wider options become visible within UCL Geography (and the UK education system in general) – I feel that the breadth of module choices at UCLA gives you more to say for yourself as a graduate. I do have to admit that more people at UCLA seem to have their CVs and careers in mind throughout university than back home, where all my friends are just now realising how soon it is until they graduate and become actual adults.

As a whole, I wouldn’t say that the American university system is necessarily easier, but instead it’s just different. It feels more like a school here, with regular projects every few weeks, midterms/finals tests making it a lot harder to procrastinate. In comparison, UCL’s system gives us several months of independent summer revision time in which it’s entirely down to us to focus and not reach new levels of procrastination – as personal experience found out, it turns out it is possible to watch an entire TV series in a day. I do have to say I prefer UK exams, as they give you the time to learn and expand upon teaching, rather than simply regurgitating answers onto a short question exam and promptly forgetting it all to learn everything for your next exam a few days later. The UK system also greater incentive to try and reach academic standards, rather than easily meeting an American 90+ grade – in terms of academia and further study, the UK system thus gives us greater preparation for the future.

 

---

References:

SOAS (n/d) ‘US Grade Conversion’ [online] (https://www.soas.ac.uk/studyabroad/current/file77182.pdf; accessed 20.1.18).

Weko, T. (2004) New Dogs and Old Tricks: What Can the UK Teach the US about University Education, Washington, D.C: Higher Education Policy Institute.

 

Winter Quarter Modules

As we near the end of January and enter week 4 of classes, the winter quarter has well and truly begun. I can hardly believe that my year is over halfway done! As I discussed earlier, I want to benefit from the wide variety of courses available at UCLA in order to benefit my geographical knowledge, and also broader skills. My course choices for this winter quarter are therefore:

Geography 113: Humid Tropics (Thomas Gillespie)
Several of my friends had mentioned this class to me in the previous fall quarter as an excellent physical geography course for learning about the biodiversity of the global tropics region, with a specific focus on coral reefs and tropical rainforests. The coral reefs we see today represent a ‘developmental episode’ of around 5,000 years and provide a vast structural framework for an enormous number of marine organisms (Allen & Steene, 1996: 3). Having visited a few coral reefs myself in the Pacific, I’m enjoying learning about the scientific processes behind these landscapes, and also understanding how they are endangered by human activities.
Midterm: 30%, Final: 40%, Group Project: 30%

Geography M128: Global Environment and Development: Problems and Issues (Joel Miller)

So far, GeogM128 is focusing on the arrival of agriculture within pre-modern society and its impact upon human development, economic development and the contentious political nature of natural resources (such as the building of dams). This class seems to have quite strong links with the Human Ecology first year module back home in UCL, and uses several case studies to exemplify the contentious nature of development upon certain environments, such as Rwanda’s recovery after its genocide or the displacement of Tibetan communities due to mining (Andre & Plateau, 1996; WTO, 2015). As it is assessed mainly through essays, I’m hoping that this class will give me the opportunity to expand upon topics I’ve studied at UCL whilst writing these essays.
Writing Projects: 68%, Quizzes: 30%, Course Evaluation: 2%

Management 1A: Principles of Accounting (Julie Gardner)
Accounting is something that I’ve never really thought about, or considered learning about whilst at university. However, whilst I’m keen to ignore the fact that I’m graduating in a year, I thought that studying a module of management accounting could improve my business understanding whilst applying for jobs. With an eye-watering $80 course reader, it’s been a challenge for me to study something so out of my comfort zone, however I do think it will prove useful in the future (even if it reinforces the fact that, for now, Geography was the right choice as a degree!). Warren Buffet himself describes accounting as “the language of business“, therefore whether I use this within a graduate job or perhaps just to understand banking slightly more, I think it will have been a useful module to choose.

Midterm: 35%, Final: 45%, Assignments: 20%

 

---

References:

Allen, G.R. & R. Steene (1996) Indo-Pacific Coral Reef Field Guide, Tropical Reef Research: Singapore.

Andre and Platteau (1996) Land tenure under unbearable stress: Rwanda caught in the Malthusian trap, Facultés Universitaires Notre-Dame de la Paix: Paris.

World Trade Organization, 2015, Dispute settlement: DS431 China: Measures Related to the Exportation of Rare Earths, Tungsten and Molybdenum.

Summary of my first quarter at UCLA: the good (and the not-so-good)

Now that I’m back home, I’d like to do one final blog post of 2017 as a summary of my time so far at UCLA (how has three months gone by this quickly?!). So, as the title shows, lets get started with the good:

The Good

Looking back on it, choosing to study abroad at UCLA is one of the best choices I’ve made in a long time. Sure, I’m graduating a year later and the majority of my friends won’t be in my lectures when I return (despite how hard I tried to persuade them to join me and escape for the year!). However, I’ve made some friends for life here and had a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to live in one of the best areas in LA, studying at an American university for a fraction of the price it would normally cost. The campus itself is stunning – having come from UCL which feels like it’s right at the heart of London, I still can’t get used to (a) the huge size of the campus, with 44,947 students in total (UCLA Admissions, 2016), and (b) how unlike LA it feels – it’s so green and spacious that it really could be in the middle of nowhere instead of a massive city!

The weather is undoubtedly one of the best parts of the West Coast – it’s been so lovely wandering around campus without the five layers of clothing I’d have to wear in London! This warm winter weather could be linked more negatively to the presence of La Niña pushing the jet stream northward and giving warmer air across southern states (Holthaus, 2017), with the IPCC’s lower climate scenario (B1) predicting LA’s heatwaves to quadruple in frequency (under A1, these would become 6-8 times as frequent) (Hayhoe et al., 2004). Whilst in the long term this warm weather is clearly a problem (as I earlier discussed with the rising threat of wildfires), for now it admittedly is well appreciated and makes exploring the city so much nicer (I hope this doesn’t make me a traitor to geography).

Finally, the people I’ve met (both American and English) have made the transition over to LA a lot easier than I was anticipating – and I can already tell how fast the upcoming year is going to go. I’ve been to a proper thanksgiving, I’ve joined a sorority, I’ve gone up skyscrapers, around Melrose Avenue, and down to the beaches – and it wouldn’t have been nearly as fun if not for the friends who put up with my touristic desires to see all of LA from top to bottom. Over the upcoming few months, I’m hoping to visit Yosemite, Arizona (Grand Canyon/Antelope Canyon), Seattle and possibly Denver.

 

The Not-So-Good

One key problem I’ve experienced in LA is the lack of effective public transport and the extent of congestion. I don’t necessarily agree with the opinions of  those like Mike Davis (2006), who predicted – in perhaps a slightly hyperbolic way – that the whole of southern California would eventually become “one huge angry parking lot”. However, researching LA bus statistics (as part of my Cities and Social Difference ethnographic fieldwork) showed that a reported 2 million fewer people used the bus between 2015 to 2016 in LA (Aron, 2017), with the bus being largely used as a ‘last resort’ for those who don’t have the means to commute or travel privately by car (Stradling et al., 2007).  It’s frustrating to come from London which, for all its sins, has a pretty decent public transport network, but then live in a city which is so reliant on cars (as I’ve been repeatedly told, UCLA’s joke is: What happens when the smog lifts? U see LA – cue canned laughter). I’d like to focus on LA’s transport and urban sprawl in a future blog post so watch this space!

UCLA Geography, in my opinion, seems to promote less difficult exams, but ones which are set more frequently (rather than the end of year stress at UCL). However, I do have to admit that it’s a little bizarre to be studying topics such as urban social inequalities along lines of difference such as race, age or gender – but then being examined in simple multiple choice questions with answers each no longer than a few words. I feel that UCL’s approach to essay-based exams/coursework gives us a more nuanced understanding of certain geographical issues. I’ve put in a question I was given in my Population Geography final exam below, just to give you an example. The mortality decline in Europe was obviously place-specific, with differences in rural/urban and in rich/poor, as well as being highly variegated by country. I learnt a huge variety of facts within this module, but it was taught from one singular textbook which is already a few years old, meaning it taught a variety of topics but with less complexity, whilst Geography at UCL has always been shown as a complex issue which cannot be summarized by sweeping generalizations – hence why we are given so many further readings for each lecture. The perhaps reductionist approach of UCLA’s courses may thus prioritize learning a wider variety of topics but in much less complexity.

 

All in all, I can’t wait to head back over to the west coast and see how my remaining time there goes. I hope you’ve all enjoyed these posts so far, and Merry Christmas/Happy New Year to everyone (or anyone) reading this!

---

List of References:

Aron, H. (2017) ‘Public Transit in L.A. Is Growing in Leaps and Bounds – but Where Are the Riders?’, L.A. Weekly [online] (http://www.laweekly.com/news/public-transit-in-la
is-growing-in-leaps-and-bounds-but-where-are-the-riders-7784449; accessed  24.12.17).

Hayhoe, K., D. Cayan, C.B. Field, P.C. Frumhoff, E.P. Maurer, N.L. Miller, S.C. Moser, S.H. Schneider, K.N. Cahill, E.E. Cleland, L. Dale, R. Drapek, R.M. Hanemann, L.S. Kalkstein, J. Lenihan, C.K. Lunch, R.P. Neilson, S.C. Sheridan & J.H. Verville (2004) ‘Emissions pathways, climate change, and impacts on California’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101(34): 12422-12427.

Holthaus, E. (2017) ‘What Happened to Winter?’, Pacific Standard [online] (https://psmag.com; accessed 24.12.17).

Stradling, S., M. Carreno, T. Rye & A. Noble (2007) ‘Passenger Perceptions and the ideal urban bus journey experience’, Transport Policy, 14(4): 283-292.

UCLA Admissions (2016) ‘Quick Facts About UCLA’ [online] (http://www.admission.ucla.edu/campusprofile.htm; accessed 24.12.17).