This chapter outlines the methodology employed throughout the book, which is centred on a transdisciplinary literature review integrating perspectives from development sociology, evolutionary anthropology, gender studies and political ecology. The review encompasses archaeological evidence ranging from gendered labour divisions in the Pleistocene era to contemporary reports from the IPCC and ECLAC. Through fieldwork observations in Mexico, Ecuador, Argentina and Venezuela, this reflexive approach is immersed in Latin American socio-ecological realities, prioritising marginalised epistemologies and avoiding external impositions. An exhaustive review is combined with specific case studies that illuminate the historical and evolutionary dimensions of women's climate adaptations, as well as current manifestations of displacement in the region. Ethical limitations are addressed, including the author's academic privilege, alongside considerations of rigour and the potential for bias in interpreting Indigenous and rural voices. This methodology ensures both internal coherence and external validity, fostering a decolonial approach that positions women as active participants in the production of knowledge. This approach contributes to academic debates on resilience and environmental justice in the context of the global climate crisis.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Methodology

  • Diosey Ramon Lugo-Morin

摘要

This chapter outlines the methodology employed throughout the book, which is centred on a transdisciplinary literature review integrating perspectives from development sociology, evolutionary anthropology, gender studies and political ecology. The review encompasses archaeological evidence ranging from gendered labour divisions in the Pleistocene era to contemporary reports from the IPCC and ECLAC. Through fieldwork observations in Mexico, Ecuador, Argentina and Venezuela, this reflexive approach is immersed in Latin American socio-ecological realities, prioritising marginalised epistemologies and avoiding external impositions. An exhaustive review is combined with specific case studies that illuminate the historical and evolutionary dimensions of women's climate adaptations, as well as current manifestations of displacement in the region. Ethical limitations are addressed, including the author's academic privilege, alongside considerations of rigour and the potential for bias in interpreting Indigenous and rural voices. This methodology ensures both internal coherence and external validity, fostering a decolonial approach that positions women as active participants in the production of knowledge. This approach contributes to academic debates on resilience and environmental justice in the context of the global climate crisis.