Background
In our last lab, we began our exploration of the Capitalocene by analyzing quantitative data and read Daniel Hartley’s “Against the Anthropocene” as a frame. He asserts that because the Anthropocene sweeps people into a collective “humanity,” the geological frame assumes that each person on Earth is equally at fault for the climate and environmentally-based changes we are experiencing and that each person experiences those changes in the same ways. In an attempt to determine if the Capitalocene is a worthwhile framing of our current moment, we continued our investigation of World Bank and EPI data and added a third indicator by which to measure the Captialocene. Also from the World Bank’s data repository, our lab group chose to include country-level data on the percentage of countries’ populations living in slums. In literature provided by the World Bank, the group explains, “Slums are generally considered to be places in cities where the poor are concentrated in substandard conditions,” (27). Although using data at the country-level does not adequately provide the detail required to move far enough away from the universalistic claims implied by the “Anthropocene,” The World Bank does acknowledge that because “Slums vary from place to place and country to country,” a multidimensional definition of ‘slum’ is required.
Procedure
After choosing the percentage of people that live in slums per country as our third indicator, we merged it into the spreadsheet of our data from last week which contained the EPI scores and income group listings per country. Once we were sure that all of that data lined up, we then created an ArcGIS map to show these indicators in a more comprehensive way than a spreadsheet or a table. This also allows for a quick comparison between the 6 different maps. After manipulating the map layers to demonstrate the data that we have accumulated, we were then able to draw conclusions about the connections between EPI, income and slum percentage.
Results
The following maps display trends in the data we analyzed and add to global discussions about the Capitalocene.
Discussion
Last week, our comparison of the World Bank and Yale’s EPI data showed that capital affects the environment. When we compared country-level data on environmental performance, ecosystem vitality and health with income group, we found that countries with higher incomes performed better environmentally, and countries with lower incomes performed worse. By adding another indicator of capital, the percentage of population living in slums, we wanted to give more depth to our analysis of the Capitalocene as a useful frame. Using GIS to represent the data visually, we found that countries in lower income groups and perform worse environmentally also have higher percentages of their populations living in slums.
Featured Image source
Grace Anderson 