9:16 p.m.
Dear all,
Last semester the IMS Green cluster became the IMS Environment cluster, thus opening up
the group for examining how media and signs participate in the making and unmaking of
environments. We organized readings of key theoretical texts from media ecology -- Mark
B.N. Hansen on the concept of phenomenotechnics -- and hosted a lecture by semiotician
Claudio Paolucci on semiotic lifeworlds. Additionally, we organized in collaboration with
Chiel Kattenbelt a workshop on Lars Elleström's semiotic modalities with the aim to
open a conversation about to what extent they are affected by recent media technological
developments such as LLM:s and other machine learning algorithms.
A basic idea that we came back to time and again during these events is that the relation
between an organism and its environment is recursive: the environment is made by the
organism and the organism made by the environment. In human environments or lifeworlds,
this recursive process is mediated by -- among other things -- technologies and signs. The
human ecology is a semiotic techno-ecology.
As a next step to both widen and deepen these questions we operationalize the theoretical
work by focusing on a question that is central in environmental politics and that may be
very interesting for us as environmental or intermedial humanities scholars. We want to
enter the mitigation vs. adaptation debate which originally is a debate about how to
respond in the most efficient way to the climate-ecological crisis, but that will have
crucial implications for cultural criticism too. It is our goal to expand it to include
both the relation between society and nature and the relation between society and
technology. We plan to develop these ideas for a while, with a sort of culmination in
autumn 2028 where we will host the Association of Adaptation Studies conference in Växjö,
on the theme of exactly these questions.
So, to begin our investigations we are sharing four texts for our meeting. The IPCC
Summary for policymakers is of course a standard document that it is good to be familiar
with, both as an intermedial communication effort and as a political document. Then we
have the short 2005 “Introduction to papers on mitigation and adaptation etc…” that has
some valuable phrasings for us. And then Wang et al’s “Climate Change: strategies for
mitigation and adaptation” from 2026. A visually appealing and thus intermedially
interesting presenting of our thematic. Read as much as you can of the three texts, they
are meant to be a sort of basis for our future discussions.
And then finally, the proposal call for the 2028 Adaptation conference, where we continue
classic intermedial discussions while also driving it towards environmental and adaptation
questions.
As always, the seminar takes place in Dacke and on Zoom:
https://lnu-se.zoom.us/j/69646780177
Best wishes,
Erik and Jørgen
[https://res.public.onecdn.static.microsoft/assets/fluentui-resources/1.1.0/app-min/assets/item-types/24/zip.png]Ims_Env_october_2026.zip<https://linnaeus-my.sharepoint.com/:u:/g/personal/ereraa_lnu_se/IQD85WfPAvi1Sari_C26AIoXATEfpN2f1-6NUl4wYZq23Hg>
[https://res.public.onecdn.static.microsoft/assets/fluentui-resources/1.1.0/app-min/assets/item-types/24/docx.png]Linnaeus
AAS conference
proposal.docx<https://linnaeus-my.sharepoint.com/:w:/g/personal/ereraa_l…
7:32 p.m.
Hi all,
this is just a note in case you are reading the materials for tomorrow.
There is quite a bit of reading, but here are a few hints: you can read the short
2005-text as a principal formulation of mitigation and adaptation approaches, and then the
2025 review article (35 pages) more as a state of the art overview of climate change with
very valuable up to date information that we can all use in our eco-work - also,
interesting to see as a highly intermedial media product, very nicely formatted! For our
"humanities" purposes, there are very interesting ideas about lifestyle and
education from p 23 and onwards. And then the IPCC Summary for policy makers: you may have
read that one already, but note the significant absence of the idea of adaptation; it is
all mitigation. What do we make of that choice?
Based on this, and our own reflections, we shall discuss how a focus on the
mitigation and/vs adaptation terms might help us see new possible ways forward, and deepen
our critial understandings, based on our earlier readings.
And with a practical goal in the horizon: to organise an adaptation on adaptation
conference in autumn 2028 in Växjö!
See you tomorrow,
Jørgen
Sent from Outlook for Mac
From: Erik Erlanson <erik.erlanson(a)lnu.se>
Date: Monday, 12 October 2026 at 21:16
To: ims.green(a)lists.sunet.se <ims.green(a)lists.sunet.se>
Subject: [Ims.environment] IMS Environment October 28th 10-12
Dear all,
Last semester the IMS Green cluster became the IMS Environment cluster, thus opening up
the group for examining how media and signs participate in the making and unmaking of
environments. We organized readings of key theoretical texts from media ecology -- Mark
B.N. Hansen on the concept of phenomenotechnics -- and hosted a lecture by semiotician
Claudio Paolucci on semiotic lifeworlds. Additionally, we organized in collaboration with
Chiel Kattenbelt a workshop on Lars Elleström's semiotic modalities with the aim to
open a conversation about to what extent they are affected by recent media technological
developments such as LLM:s and other machine learning algorithms.
A basic idea that we came back to time and again during these events is that the relation
between an organism and its environment is recursive: the environment is made by the
organism and the organism made by the environment. In human environments or lifeworlds,
this recursive process is mediated by -- among other things -- technologies and signs. The
human ecology is a semiotic techno-ecology.
As a next step to both widen and deepen these questions we operationalize the theoretical
work by focusing on a question that is central in environmental politics and that may be
very interesting for us as environmental or intermedial humanities scholars. We want to
enter the mitigation vs. adaptation debate which originally is a debate about how to
respond in the most efficient way to the climate-ecological crisis, but that will have
crucial implications for cultural criticism too. It is our goal to expand it to include
both the relation between society and nature and the relation between society and
technology. We plan to develop these ideas for a while, with a sort of culmination in
autumn 2028 where we will host the Association of Adaptation Studies conference in Växjö,
on the theme of exactly these questions.
So, to begin our investigations we are sharing four texts for our meeting. The IPCC
Summary for policymakers is of course a standard document that it is good to be familiar
with, both as an intermedial communication effort and as a political document. Then we
have the short 2005 “Introduction to papers on mitigation and adaptation etc…” that has
some valuable phrasings for us. And then Wang et al’s “Climate Change: strategies for
mitigation and adaptation” from 2026. A visually appealing and thus intermedially
interesting presenting of our thematic. Read as much as you can of the three texts, they
are meant to be a sort of basis for our future discussions.
And then finally, the proposal call for the 2028 Adaptation conference, where we continue
classic intermedial discussions while also driving it towards environmental and adaptation
questions.
As always, the seminar takes place in Dacke and on Zoom:
https://lnu-se.zoom.us/j/69646780177
Best wishes,
Erik and Jørgen
[https://res.public.onecdn.static.microsoft/assets/fluentui-resources/1.1.0/app-min/assets/item-types/24/zip.png]Ims_Env_october_2026.zip<https://linnaeus-my.sharepoint.com/:u:/g/personal/ereraa_lnu_se/IQD85WfPAvi1Sari_C26AIoXATEfpN2f1-6NUl4wYZq23Hg>
[https://res.public.onecdn.static.microsoft/assets/fluentui-resources/1.1.0/app-min/assets/item-types/24/docx.png]Linnaeus
AAS conference
proposal.docx<https://linnaeus-my.sharepoint.com/:w:/g/personal/ereraa_l…
8
days inactive
23
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Erik Erlanson -
Jørgen Bruhn