What is Political about GEP Flashcards
(9 cards)
What defines the North/South divide?
The Global North refers to industrialized, wealthy nations with greater economic and political power (e.g., U.S., EU).
The Global South includes developing countries with limited access to resources and decision-making in global governance (Elliott, 2004).
North-South tensions in environmental politics
CBDR (Common But Differentiated Responsibilities) reflects Southern claims that the North caused most environmental damage and should lead mitigation (Elliott 2004).
The South demands additionality—new resources, not repackaged aid (Elliott 2004).
Clapp & Dauvergne (2011): North consumes disproportionately more; South bears the brunt of environmental harm.
Political strategies of the South
Use of issue linkage (e.g., environment + trade) to increase bargaining power (Elliott 2004).
G-77 acts as a “trade union of the poor” to amplify Southern interests, despite internal contradictions (Axelrod, 2019)
What is mitigation?
Aim: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions to slow climate change.
Often prioritized by the North, which has the technology and capital (UNFCCC, Elliott 2004).
What is adaptation?
Aim: Adjust societies to cope with climate impacts (e.g., droughts, sea-level rise).
Prioritized by the South due to vulnerability and fewer resources (Elliott 2004; Axelrod 2015, Ch. 11).
Equity dimension of mitigation and adaptation
Climate finance is often skewed towards mitigation.
South argues adaptation must be equally funded and locally driven (UNFCCC; Elliott 2004).
Theories of GEP
Market Liberals (Clapp & Dauvergne, 2011)
Growth solves environmental problems via innovation and wealth.
Tools: carbon trading, green tech, voluntary corporate actions.
Institutionalists
Trust in multilateralism and international regimes (e.g., UNEP, UNFCCC).
Emphasize governance reforms, technology transfer, and sustainability norms.
Bioenvironmentalists
Warn of overshooting Earth’s carrying capacity.
Urge population control, degrowth, and biophysical limits (e.g., Paul Ehrlich, Herman Daly).
Social Greens
Link environmental harm to inequality and capitalism.
Advocate for local control, indigenous rights, and environmental justice (e.g., Vandana Shiva).
Taylor and Buttel’s three propositions (1992)
Politics is embedded in science
How we define environmental problems is shaped by political and scientific choices.
“Global” problems are constructed, not just discovered.
Dominance of moral and technocratic discourses
Global environmental politics uses universal “humanity” narratives or defers to expert management.
This masks real conflicts over power, responsibility, and justice.
Environmental discourse is vulnerable to deconstruction
North-South tensions reveal how science and policy are framed to reflect Global North priorities (Taylor & Buttel 1992).
Why Is It Controversial to Call an Environmental Problem ‘Global’?
Power and framing
Framing issues as global often centralizes decision-making in the North and marginalizes local contexts (Taylor & Buttel 1992).
North–South asymmetries
South sees “global” framing as eco-imperialism, especially when local development is restricted for global goals (Elliott 2004).
Systemic vs. Cumulative issues (Turner et al., 1990)
Systemic: e.g., climate change—truly global in origin and impact.
Cumulative: e.g., deforestation—local issues aggregated to global scale.
Labeling both “global” may oversimplify causes and appropriate responses.
Disciplinary bias
Natural sciences dominate global environmental assessments (e.g., IPCC), sidelining social knowledge and Southern perspectives (Taylor & Buttel 1992).
