4. Non-state actors

Author(s):  
Jean-Frédéric Morin ◽  
Amandine Orsini ◽  
Sikina Jinnah

This chapter focuses on non-state actors in global environmental governance. Non-state actors, such as non-governmental organisations (NGOs), corporations, and transnational networks, play an increasingly significant role in global environmental politics. Some of them, such as Greenpeace and Shell, became well known by communicating directly with the public or consumers. Others, such as the Indigenous Peoples' International Centre for Policy Research and Education or the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, are less visible to the wider public but no less influential. The scope, diversity, preferences, methods of engagement, and contributions of non-state actors to global environmental governance are often overshadowed by a focus on state actors. The chapter sheds light on how non-state actors engage in global environmental governance and highlights how they shape the political landscape in this field.

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 72-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liam Campling ◽  
Elizabeth Havice

This article situates seafood in the larger intersection between global environmental governance and the food system. Drawing inspiration from the food regimes approach, we trace the historical unfolding of the seafood system and its management between the 1930s and the 2010s. In doing so, we bridge global environmental politics research that has studied either the politics of fisheries management or seafood sustainability governance, and we bring seafood and the fisheries crisis into food regimes scholarship. Our findings reveal that the seafood system has remained firmly dependent on the historical institutions of national seafood production systems and, particularly, on the state-based regulatory regimes that they promulgated in support of national economic and geopolitical interests. As such, seafood systems contribute to a broader, historicized understanding of the hybrid global environmental governance of food systems in which nonstate actors depend heavily upon, and in fact call for the strengthening of, state-based institutions. Our findings reveal that the contemporary private ordering of seafood governance solidifies the centrality of state-based institutions in the struggle for “sustainable” seafood and enables the continued expansionary, volume-driven extractivist logics that produced the fisheries crisis in the first place.


Author(s):  
Noah J. Toly

In The Gardeners’ Dirty Hands: Global Environmental Politics and Christian Ethics, Noah Toly engages the resources of Christian theological ethics to identify, explore, and respond to the most salient feature of contemporary environmental challenges. In conversation with contributions to Christian ethics, Toly argues that modern environmental thought, global environmental governance, climate change, and the Anthropocene are characterized by a struggle with the tragic, which may be described as the need to give up, forego, undermine, or destroy one or more goods to possess or secure one or more other goods. Drawing upon the work of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Toly develops a “Cruciform imaginary” that should inform our responses to the tragic.


2003 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 72-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Falkner

This article discusses private environmental governance at the global level. It is widely acknowledged that corporations play an increasing role in global environmental politics, not only as lobbyists in international negotiations or agents of implementation, but also as actors creating private institutional arrangements that perform environmental governance functions. The rise of such private forms of global governance raises a number of questions for the study of global environmental politics: How does private governance interact with state-centric governance? In what ways are the roles/capacities of states and nonstate actors affected by private governance? Does the rise of private governance signify a shift in the ideological underpinnings of global environmental governance? This article explores these questions, seeking a better understanding of the significance of private environmental governance for International Relations.


Significance The meeting will set a new Global Biodiversity Framework and agree targets to be met by 2030. Scientists and civil society organisations consider it an opportunity to set in train the political leadership and public engagement needed to address the urgent global biodiversity crisis. Impacts China has an opportunity to show leadership on global environmental governance and to showcase its biodiversity conservation achievements. The BRI will face criticism for the biodiversity impacts of its infrastructure projects overseas. Financing arrangements for implementing any agreements will be crucial, and difficult to agree.


Author(s):  
Jean-Frédéric Morin ◽  
Amandine Orsini ◽  
Sikina Jinnah

This chapter explores the ideas and debates which shape global environmental politics. At least three types of socially constructed ideas play a key role in international environmental governance: world views, causal beliefs, and social norms. However, ideas are not universally shared, which means that ideological clashes are a feature of global environmental governance. The chapter looks at five of the major ideological debates that have marked the evolution of global environmental governance. The first two debates present conflicting world views: the first concerns the scope of environmental values, while the second examines the intrinsic values of non-human organisms. The following two debates concern causal beliefs: one is about the relationship between human intervention and environmental protection, while the other concerns the relationship between economic growth and environmental degradation. The last debate considers different social norms related to environmental justice and the appropriate behaviours expected towards historically marginalized populations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document