7.3 KiB
| title | chunk | source | category | tags | date_saved | instance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Residual Governance | 3/3 | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Residual_Governance | reference | science, encyclopedia | 2026-05-05T08:41:14.807569+00:00 | kb-cron |
== Critical reception == Academic reviewers have analyzed the book's theoretical framework, particularly its development of "residual governance" as a concept linking waste management, bureaucratic minimalism, and the treatment of people and places as disposable. Iva Peša in the American Historical Review notes that Hecht "masterfully combines two vastly different scales" in showing connections between state and mining actors while documenting effects on residents. Tracy-Lynn Field and Michael Hennessy Picard in the European Journal of International Law describe it as "a gripping account of the mine wastes of the Rand, viewed from the perspective of activists and community leaders," and praised Hecht for honoring activists who "refuse to allow residual waste to escape unnoticed." The book's use of Charles Mills's racial contract theory has drawn scholarly attention. Mikhail Moosa (African Studies Review) observes that the work "expands on her earlier work on technopolitics in France and West Africa, while drawing substantively on Charles Mills's critique of liberal social contract theory." Ivan Evans (Contemporary Sociology) analyzed how Hecht builds on Mills's framework to demonstrate what she terms a "deadly trifecta" of policies that expose South Africans to mining byproducts, official reliance on misleading information, and an administrative approach that "treats people and places as waste and wastelands." Evans noted that while some scholars might view the book's passionate tone as polemical, "the fierce tone of the book is appropriate to the Anthropocene." Tholithemba Lorenzo Ndaba (South African Journal of Science) traces how Hecht connects environmental problems to "a racial contract functioning as a technopolitical entity, deliberately designing residues like mine dumps to achieve political objectives." While praising Hecht's writing style and use of primary sources including archival materials and photographs, Ndaba identified limitations including the book's tendency to generalize Johannesburg's issues to all of South Africa and what he views as insufficient incorporation of community voices through interviews, particularly regarding the Tudor Shaft settlement. Anne Heffernan (British Journal for the History of Science) reviews the book alongside Faeeza Ballim's work on South Africa's electricity sector, and notes that both books address "the enduring communal and environmental impacts" of extractive industries. Mariaelena De Stefano's review in L'Uomo Società Tradizione Sviluppo characterizes the book as combining narrative and visual media, with images, maps, and photographs by local artists transforming the reader from "simple observer to conscious explorer." De Stefano points out that the work "is not a manual with easy solutions" and lauds Hecht for recognizing that "knowledge alone is not sufficient to generate change or promote reparative interventions." De Stefano emphasizes the book's call to "humanize where others—decision makers, politicians, bureaucrats, technicians—dehumanize" and to "not remain calm just to continue as always." Nancy Jacobs describes the work as "a ferocious book about Gauteng's mine dumps as sacrifice zones of racial capitalism" and "an essential exposé of the depredations that define our current epoch, the Anthropocene." Jacobs explains the multiple layers of the title's meaning—from state regulation of waste, to minimized regulation, to the management of places and people as wastelands. She stresses Hecht's use of the term "wicked problems" for issues with contested definitions and no single optimal solutions, and praised her ability to make "technological complexity manageable for a humanities audience". Jacobs also emphasized the author's effectiveness as "a voice against obfuscation," and the book's attention to artists including Peter Abrahams, Ernest Cole, and contemporary photographer Potšišo Phasha, as well as its centering of activists like Jeffrey Ramoruti and Mariette Liefferink. She describes Hecht's voice as "by turns witty, unbelieving, impatient, and outraged" and says that the book offers important lessons: "Community matters. Knowledge matters. Storytelling matters. There is no alternative to perseverance, struggle, and honest thought." Lorenzo Olivieri and Alessio Gerola in Tecnoscienza describe the book as "a marvelous work that focuses on the strategies used by mining companies and South Africa's governments to (not) manage the various kinds of waste and hazardous substances produced by mining activities."
=== Africa roundtable === Africa published a roundtable of the book, with three reviews and a response by Hecht. Lorenzo D'Angelo characterizes the narrative structure as one that "loops and spirals through time," creating what he describes as a work "written in honest anger, with stunning vehemence and exquisite one-liners." D'Angelo notes the book's extensive visual materials, including photographs from South African artists, and questiones why Hecht didn't adopt a more explicitly transnational approach, though he acknowledges the need for detailed empirical engagement. While, Jan-Bart Gewald describes reading the book as being "pummelled by a heavyweight," and says that "it is difficult not to walk away despondent and despairing, the issues she describes are so enormous, the damage so extensive." Despite this, Gewald argues that "such work has to be written, and it has to be read if we are ever to right the wrongs of the past." Melusi Nkomo situates the work within existing scholarship on post-apartheid South Africa, observing that while the story of apartheid's persistence has been told before, Hecht "carved her own niche out of the story" by focusing on residual governance in Gauteng Province. Nkomo credits Hecht for "organizing so many aspects into a coherent and captivating analysis" and for "painting a generous picture of the continuing struggle for social justice in the rubble of capitalism," though he suggests the book implies rather than directly presents answers to why mining residues remain such a persistent problem. The author responded to reviews by Nkomo, D'Angelo, and Gewald. Hecht defends her methodological choices, explaining that "refusing to produce a short, quotable response is my way of resisting the solutionism sought by so-called sustainability studies." She clarifies that residual governance "gains traction through accretion" with each layer of waste and regulation putting "resistance and repair further out of reach." Regarding D'Angelo's question about geographic scope, she acknowledges originally intending a transnational approach but explained that "challenging the fictions of 'sustainable development' required detailed empirical engagement."
== Awards == 2024 PROSE Award in Government and Politics, Association of American Publishers 2024 PROSE Award for Excellence in Social Science, Association of American Publishers 2024 E. Ohnuki Tierney Award for Historical Anthropology, American Anthropological Association 2024 Best Book Award, African Studies Association Third Place, Victor Turner Award for Ethnographic Writing, Society For Humanistic Anthropoloy Finalist, Fleck Prize, Society for the Social Studies of Science
== References ==