Sources! Flashcards
Memorise! (14 cards)
Essential Textbooks
- Elliot, Lorraine, 2005
- Clapp, Dauvergne, 2005
- Chasek et al., 2013
- Axelrod et al., 2015
Globalisation of discourse
Shiva, 1993:
The ‘global’ in the dominant discourse is the political space in which a particular local seeks global control, and frees itself of local, national and international restraints. The global does not represent the universal human interest, it represents aparticular local and parochial interest which has been globalized through the scope of its reach.
= pressure of large organisations is negatively affecting policy
Taylor and Buttel, 1992:
We know we have globalvenvironmental problems, in part, because we act as if we are a unitary and not a differentiated “we”
= importance of global discourse to win people over
Business, green groups and the media: the role of non-governmental organisations in the climate change debate
Carpenter, 2001
How do we know we have global environmental problems? Science and the globalisation of discourse
Taylor, Buttel, 1992:
* “Limits to Growth”-model assumes each individual acts in an economically rational way. This assumption does not work for all societies
* The fact that this book still became influential signifies that global discourse is an important force in convincing people abt. “global” environmental problems
* “Globalisation” of environmental concerns affects what politicial solutions are considered acceptable
Epistemic communities and international policy coordination
Haas, 1992
Seeing “RED”? “Avoided deforestation” and the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities’, Forest People’s Programme
Griffiths, 2007
Do trees grow on money? The implications of deforestation research for policies to promote REDD
Kanninen et al, 2007
‘Two types of global environmental change’
Turner et al., 1990:
* Systemic: change in global system
* Cumulative: globally occuring, but not systemically linked
“The root causes of biodiversity loss”
Wood et al. (2000):
- Demographic pressure from fertility and migration
- Poverty and inequality
- Geographic isolation from markets or other forms of trade
- Macroeconomic policies (e.g. encouraging agricultural exports) → Brazil
- Int. pol. relationships that might encourage trading links with timber consumers → Burma selling logging rights to China
- Poor env. management
Why differentiate between products and processes?
Axelrod et al, 2015
- Countries have a mutual interest that trade in hazardous products does not occur
- WTO recognises this (GATT Article XX)
- However, the same is not true for processes, where producing countries might easily disagree
- Moreover, importing country’s attempts to regulate another nations production processes might be seen as an encroachment on that nations sovereignty
What is the Kuznets Curve?
** Axelrod et al., 2015**
* Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC): There is clear evidence that, although economic growth usually leads to environmental degradation in the early stages of the process, in the end the best – and probably the only – way to attain a decent environment in most countries is to become rich
* Critics argue dirty industry never scales back, it just moves. Additionally, the curve may also decline due to the desire of the state or population
The Dolphin/Tuna dispute
Elliot, Lorraine (2005)
* GATTs Article XX allowed for protectionism and favors if necessary to protect human, animal, plant life or health; or for the protection of exhaustible resources (in conjunction with restrictions on domestic production/ consumption) (WTO, 2025)
* In 1990, and after some prolonged NGO/civil society pressure, the US stopped importing tuna from countries that did not have conservation programmes to protect dolphins. Mexico and Venezuela complained to GATT that US was overruling their sovereignty over manufacturing processes
* GATT decided against US for undermining multilateral trade rules, as it could also just have come to agreements with exporters
* USA instead developed “dolphin-friendly” label for tuna cans, cans that did not have this label soon fell out of favour
Explain the content and significance of the Cartagena Protocol
Peter, (2005):
* Trade to occur freely if receiving countries were willing to accept GMOs, imports could be banned over health concerns
* Advance Informed Agreement: all shipments of LMOs & GMOs had to be clearly labelled
* Any Biosafety Protocol-party looking to use LMOs which would then potentially subject to export must use Biosafety Clearing House to inform other parties within 15 days of the decision
* EU still sceptical: moratorium on GMOs 1998-2004, thereafter allowed it with clear labelling/traceability rules
Why is it so difficult to negotiate international regimes to protect in-situ diversity?
- Chapin, 2004: indigenous concerns not incorporatet enough
- Chasek et al. (2013): concerns about sovereignty, bioprospecting
- Developing countries might want to prefer to use their land economically rather than for conservation
