Which author critiques the colonial legacy embedded in environmental knowledge and highlights uneven power relations in knowledge production?

• A. Bubandt, N. Rubber boots methods for the Anthropocene
• B. Parsons, Laurie. Skeletons, dragons and the 'climate war': Geography's colonial legacy and the uneven landscape of environmental knowledge
• C. Havlick, David G. Bombs away: Militarization, conservation, and ecological restoration
• D. Goudie, A. The Human Impact on the Natural Environment

Answer: (B)

The main concept this item tests is how colonial histories shape environmental knowledge and how power governs who produces and legitimizes that knowledge. In this perspective, the author scrutinizes geography and environmental knowledge as products infused with imperial and colonial legacies, where standards of evidence, methods, and what counts as credible knowledge are often rooted in Western frameworks. This analysis shows how Indigenous and local knowledge can be marginalized, appropriated, or given less authority, while Western scientists and institutions steer questions, funding, publication, and policy influence. By foregrounding these power dynamics, the author reveals that understanding environmental knowledge requires acknowledging who speaks, whose knowledge is validated, and how historical power relations continue to shape contemporary science and governance.

Other readings you mentioned address related environmental issues—like the Anthropocene, the militarization of conservation, or broad human impacts—but they don’t center the colonial legacy within the production and authority of environmental knowledge to the same extent.