African American teachers are in high demand in urban schools. Presupposing these spaces as operating within a matrix of domination for African Americans in the United States, in this chapter, two African American scholars of differing genders model womanist thinking as politic educational ethics and praxis. hooks, Fanon, and Lorde elucidate the Black subject’s ontological condition as a problem of spectatorship. Womanist theory responds to sociopolitical forces devaluing the self as minoritized subject. Through critical self-reflexivity that acknowledges the debilitating white normative gaze and the inner turmoil of its subjugation, womanist thinking offers a normative syntax of freedom. A womanist praxis of radical subjectivity and a pedagogy of love excavates one’s inner visions for oneself and for one’s students that engenders self-authorship.

The individual animal has often been neglected in biodiversity governance debates, with animals mainly considered in terms of species, biodiversity, wildlife or natural resources. Indeed, and somewhat counterintuitively, biodiversity governance is not always animal-friendly. Think, for example, of the issues of wildlife management, (“sport”) hunting, captive breeding, reintroduction and relocation of endangered species, and the use of animal testing in conservation research (De Mori, 2019). For some issues, the relationship is more complex, for example the “management” of Invasive Alien Species (IAS), which is detrimental to the individuals of the species considered “invasive” but beneficial to native species and habitats (Barkham, 2020). Elsewhere, economic development and incentives impact both biodiversity and animal concerns, such as the negative effects of animal agriculture (see Visseren-Hamakers, 2018a; 2020 for more detailed overviews of these relationships). How can we transform biodiversity governance in order to incorporate individual animal interests (Bernstein, 2015)? That is the central question of this chapter.

Mining products are essential in our lives. We need them to satisfy our everyday needs. The growing worldwide population, together with rising living standards, pushes up the demand for minerals. The mining industry faces continuous challenges to meet such demand and to fulfil the sustainability requirements imposed by the policy makers. Innovation is a key instrument to address these challenges. This chapter describes the mining industry and its major economic characteristics, discusses the role of innovation in the industry and the environment in which it takes place, and summarizes some of the major findings that emerge from the subsequent chapters in the book.

This chapter analyses how innovation in the mining sector responds to changes in commodity prices. For this purpose, the chapter combines commodity prices data with innovation data as captured by patent filings extracted from the WIPO database. Patents registered by both mining companies and mining equipment, technology and service firms (METS) are included. Findings from a multi-country panel analysis show that innovation in the mining sector is cyclical: it increases in periods of high commodity prices while decreasing during commodity price recessions. Innovations react more to long price-cycle variations if compared to shorter ones. METS seems the driving force of this mechanism. Mining countries, as opposed to METS ones, are found to be slower in reacting to price changes.

Successful attainment of SDG17 is essential for implementing the other 16 SDGs, all of which depend upon secure means of implementation and durable partnerships. Funding for forests from ODA and other sources has trended upwards since 2000, providing reason for cautious optimism. However, REDD+ finance is declining. Private sector investment remains important. The idea of impact investment, which aims to solve pressing environmental and social problems while providing a return for investors, could make a significant contribution to the SDGs. However, not all sustainable development finance promotes forest conservation. Increasing funding for agricultural production often incentivises the conversion of forests to agricultural land while generating deforestation. The policy of zero net deforestation (ZND) is leading to the creation of partnerships to promote deforestation-free commodity supply chains for four forest risk commodities (palm oil, soy, beef and timber). Some innovative partnerships have been created to promote sustainable development involving intergovernmental organisations, the private sector, research institutes, NGOs and grass roots organisations. However, such partnerships exist within a neoliberal global economic order in which there are net financial flows from the Global South to the Global North that negate financial flows for sustainable development.