The Environments of East Asia. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2023. US$32.00, paper; US$125.00, cloth; free ebook. ISBN 9781501768798.
This edited book covers a balanced array of themes on Korean environmental politics. David Fedman in his introduction asks the key question “whose nature?” and gets straight to the point by aiming at a “centering” of the environment “in Korean studies.” This also raises the issue as to where the boundaries of Korean studies are, should be, and why? The volume aims to reach a balance between centering the environment whilst destabilizing abstract and universal concepts such as science, modernity, and capitalism that have unleashed ecological injustice. It is rightly pointed out that the environment is not just “an array of habitats, resource pools and land titles” (2) but rather is an“idea, one tightly bound up with longstanding efforts to define the very meaning of Koreanness” (2). The aim of the volume is to build on collaborations that have “stretched and blurred the boundaries of inquiry” (5). There have been previous gestures “toward the importance” of Korea’s ecology but only recently has there been interest in “how these environmental factors—real and imagined—figure in Korea’s history” (5). Fedman rightly identifies the different historiographies coming from the state and peoples’ movements. The introduction points to how peoples’ movements have actively used the environment to challenge the state-led view of ecology as being a passive backdrop to capitalist development. There is also a focus on non-human agency in this context. A further point that may be made is identifying why certain stakeholders select particular imaginations, representations, and chronologies of what is accepted as Korea’s history. A point is made in the introduction that books on the environment have only recently claimed “residence in the house of Korean studies” (6). The volume seems to be situated within a nexus that is overcoming boundaries between Korean studies and ecology whilst at the same time placing this nexus in a wider environmental context. The link made between ecology and “Korean-ness” might also include how Korean ecology has been mobilized in real and imagined versions of Korean ethnic nationalism from the political left and the political right.
The introduction also discusses the Korean division issue and replicates “peace park” narratives, with the DMZ understood as a “green ribbon of hope.” The opening example of inter-Korean tensions in the volume is the “water fight” on the Bukhan River that “transects the Korean Demilitarized Zone” (2). There is an important reminder that watersheds such as this do not “abide geopolitical divisions” (2). This sentiment is rightly expanded to wider ecological issues throughout the volume, with a key awareness of questioning anthropocentric boundaries assumed between human and non-human ecologies. Biographical maps were collated by Marc Los Huertos and Albert L Park. The map on land usage (28) shows Korea more forested and with more grassland than this reader had expected. Fedman (5) argues that the objective of the volume is to take “the flora, fauna, soil, energy systems and climate events that have long been confined to footnotes” and put them “front and centre in analysis and argumentation.” The volume meets these objectives.
The book has four sections, with each offering a useful introduction. The first section is entitled “Imperial Interventions.” In the first chapter, John S. Lee focuses on the impact of the Mongol Empire on “shaping land” (46) in Korea. It might have also been helpful to have a brief discussion on the different understandings of land, terrain, and territory between the pre-Westphalian and/or Westphalian era. Joseph Seeley, in the chapter entitled “Dammed Fish,” links the Japanese colonial era with dam construction projects on the Yalu River and “piscatorial development.” The informative discussion resonates with contemporary issues regarding relations between upstream and downstream states. The second section is entitled “Crisis and Response.” Eleana J. Kim writes in the introduction that “an environmental perspective can offer new insights into seemingly settled histories of war and militarization, as well as industrial development and urbanization” (61). Sooa Im McCormick focuses on eighteenth-century Korean art as “the politics of frugality” (65) to explain that artistic movements were impacted by ecological crises rather than by ruling elite neo-Confucianism. In chapter 4, Hyojin Pak opens up key questions of land ownership, economic power, and identity through research on the landfill sites at Nanjido. The chapter considers how the developmentalist state generated “memory and amnesia” (77) to create a particular urban scape. In chapter 5, Ewa Erikkson Fortier and Suzy Kim focus on North Korean food security. The authors mention the Sendai Disaster Risk framework. This is important as issues of multilateralism are assumed to be the preserve of South Korea. The third section is entitled “Processes of Dispossession,” with an introduction by Albert Park. In chapter 6 Anders Riel Mueller (Yeonjun Song) focuses on rice and meat production and its impact on land. I would add that food production and consumption can also become an issue of national identity. In chapter 7 there is an analysis of food security in the context of “zombie” films. Lindsay Jolivette shows how a particular cultural art form can provide an alternative understanding of the human exploitation of nature but is rightly careful not to see nature as seeking retributive justice. The fourth section is entitled “Reclaiming Life.” In chapter 8, Yonjae Paik focuses on the fascinating phenomenon of Hansalim. This organic food project and consumer network began as a Protestant movement during the 1960s (139). Hansalim is described as an alternative to a market-based system for consumers and farmers. The chapter points out that at Wonju it was the Catholic Church that was associated with Hansalim. There are perhaps further questions regarding unequal relations between affluent urban consumers and rural farmers’ experiences. Jeongsu Shin’s chapter focuses on the “Gotjawal” ecology of Jeju Island. With a rich description of “wild space” biodiversity the author rightly links this to the new materialism of “thing power” (163). In chapter 10 Nan Kim considers relations between Korea’s nuclear energy policy and Korean democracy. Kim (173) correctly identifies Korea’s green growth programs during the 2010s and a key point is made that the debate itself “is no longer split along the conventional left-right divide of partisan politics.” In the epilogue, Albert Park and Eleana J. Kim emphasize the “contact and exchange between humans and nonhumans,” with a focus on terms such as animism, Shintoism, shamanism, and spiritualism. But I would add that these are still “isms” and potentially reflect exclusions. The “universal distinctions” between “human and nonhuman and nature and culture” are challenged (181). In a variety of thematic contexts, the volume offers a commendable balance between case study insight and alternative ecological pathways with their conceptual risks and their positive ecological opportunities.
Iain Watson
Ajou University, Suwon