scholarly journals Avoiding the ‘Anthropocene’?: An Assessment of the Extent and Nature of Engagement with Environmental Issues in Peace Research

Author(s):  
Rhys Kelly

This article critically examines the extent and nature of engagement with environmental issues within the field of peace research, and specifically with the unfolding ecological crisis (‘the Anthropocene’). A representative sample of journals and book series associated with peace research were analysed in order to a. quantify the extent of engagement with climate change and other environmental issues in peace research, and b. assess the range of discursive positions vis-a-vis the environment represented in the sample. The article finds that, in comparison to other ‘thematic niches’, environmental issues have received limited attention. It also finds that the dominant orientation of publications that do have an environmental focus can be considered ‘reformist’ - largely concerned with or assuming the possibility of significant continuity from the present. More ‘radical’ perspectives are present but in a much lower proportion. Whilst acknowledging the validity of and need for a plurality of perspectives and approaches, it is argued that the scientific evidence of an accelerating and increasingly dangerous ecological crisis does raise challenging questions for peace research. The article concludes with a call for renewed debate on the purpose(s) and assumptions of peace research, informed by a wider range of perspectives on environmental issues. It is a contribution to a tradition of critical reflection within the field but is the first to provide a systematic and grounded analysis of engagement with and perspectives on, the environment within peace research.

2021 ◽  
Vol 199 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lena Von Zabern ◽  
Christopher David Tulloch

In response to Huttunen and Albrecht’s article in this issue of Fennia we want to focus our commentary on the two key-findings regarding the media representation of environmental citizenship in the Finnish Fridays for Future (FFF) movement: individualised lifestyle choices and a dominant adult voice. This commentary dovetails into the authors’ critical reflection on the insufficiency of individual action alone in addressing environmental issues and the potential risks of a dominant adult voice for youth agency. By doing so, we will also touch on broader ideas of change within the FFF and climate change framing and aspects of (intergenerational) climate justice.


Author(s):  
Nguyen Thi Thuc An ◽  
Dau Kieu Ngoc Anh

The 2018 Nobel Economics Prize was awarded to two American economists - William D. Nordhaus and Paul M. Romer - who designed methods for better assessing environmental issues and technological advances on growth. This year’s Laureates, Nordhaus was the first person to create an intergrated model to assess interactions between society and nature and Romer laid the foundation for what is now called endogenous growth theory. According to the Swedish Royal Academy of Sciences, these two macroeconomists’ research have helped “significantly broaden the scope of economic analysis by constructing models that explain how the market economy interacts with nature and knowledge” which integrates climate change measures into long-term sustainable economic growth. Keywords Nobel in economics, William D. Nordhaus, Paul M. Romer, climate change, endogenous growth theory, economic growth References [1] Y Vân (2018), “Lý lịch 'khủng' của hai nhà khoa học vừa giành giải Nobel Kinh tế 2018”, Vietnambiz, đăng tải ngày 08/10/2018, https://vietnambiz.vn/ly-lich-khung-cua-hai-nha-khoa-hoc-vua-gianh-giai-nobel-kinh-te-2018-95776.html[2] Jonas O. Bergman, Rich Miller (2018), “Nordhaus, Romer Win Nobel for Thinking on Climate, Innovation”, đăng tải ngày 8/10/2018, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-08/nordhaus-romer-win-2018-nobel-prize-in-economic-sciences [3] Antonin Pottier (2018), “Giải Nobel” William Nordhaus có thật sự nghiêm túc?”, Nguyễn Đôn Phước dịch, đăng tải ngày 11/10/2018, http://www.phantichkinhte123.com/2018/10/giai-nobel-william-nordhaus-co-that-su.html[4] Thăng Điệp (2018), “Giải Nobel kinh tế 2018 về tay hai người Mỹ”, đăng tải ngày 8/10/2018, http://vneconomy.vn/giai-nobel-kinh-te-2018-ve-tay-hai-nguoi-my-20181008185809239.htm[5] Lars P. Syll (2018), “Cuối cùng - Paul Romer cũng có được giải thưởng Nobel”, Huỳnh Thiện Quốc Việt dịch, đăng tải ngày 14/10/2018, http://www.phantichkinhte123.com/2018/10/cuoi-cung-paul-romer-cung-co-uoc-giai.html[6] Phương Võ (2018), “Nobel Kinh tế 2018: Chạm tới bài toán khó của thời đại”, đăng tải ngày 9/10/2018, https://nld.com.vn/thoi-su-quoc-te/nobel-kinh-te-2018-cham-toi-bai-toan-kho-cua-thoi-dai-20181008221734228.htm[7] Đông Phong (2018), “Nobel Kinh tế cho giải pháp phát triển bền vững và phúc lợi người dân”, đăng tải ngày 8/10/2018, https://news.zing.vn/nobel-kinh-te-cho-giai-phap-phat-trien-ben-vung-va-phuc-loi-nguoi-dan-post882860.html[8] Thanh Trúc (2018), “Giải Nobel kinh tế 2018: Thay đổi tư duy về biến đổi khí hậu”, https://tusach.thuvienkhoahoc.com/wiki/Gi%E1%BA%A3i_Nobel_kinh_t%E1%BA%BF_2018:_Thay_%C4%91%E1%BB%95i_t%C6%B0_duy_v%E1%BB%81_bi%E1%BA%BFn_%C4%91%E1%BB%95i_kh%C3%AD_h%E1%BA%ADu[9] Cẩm Anh (2018), “Nobel kinh tế 2018: Lời giải cho tăng trưởng kinh tế bền vững”, đăng tải ngày 11/10/2018, http://enternews.vn/nobel-kinh-te-2018-loi-giai-cho-tang-truong-kinh-te-ben-vung-137600.html.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alistair Soutter ◽  
René Mõttus

Although the scientific evidence of anthropogenic climate change continues to grow, public discourse still reflects a high level of scepticism and political polarisation towards anthropogenic climate change. In this study (N = 499) we attempted to replicate and expand upon an earlier finding that environmental terminology (“climate change” versus “global warming”) could partly explain political polarisation in environmental scepticism (Schuldt, Konrath, & Schwarz, 2011). Participants completed a series of online questionnaires assessing personality traits, political preferences, belief in environmental phenomenon, and various pro-environmental attitudes and behaviours. Those with a Conservative political orientation and/or party voting believed less in both climate change and global warming compared to those with a Liberal orientation and/or party voting. Furthermore, there was an interaction between continuously measured political orientation, but not party voting, and question wording on beliefs in environmental phenomena. Personality traits did not confound these effects. Furthermore, continuously measured political orientation was associated with pro-environmental attitudes, after controlling for personality traits, age, gender, area lived in, income, and education. The personality domains of Openness, and Conscientiousness, were consistently associated with pro-environmental attitudes and behaviours, whereas Agreeableness was associated with pro-environmental attitudes but not with behaviours. This study highlights the importance of examining personality traits and political preferences together and suggests ways in which policy interventions can best be optimised to account for these individual differences.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toby Pilditch

Many of the global problems humanity is facing concern acting appropriately given the available evidence. However, issues including climate change denial (McGlade and Ekins, 2015; Steffen et al., 2015) and anti-vaccination movements (Hargreaves, Lewis, and Speers, 2003; Petrovic, Roberts, and Ramsay, 2001) appear to run contrary to overwhelming evidence. The investigation of these issues has pointed to two possible causes; either insufficient exposure to the evidence at hand, or ulterior / biased motives5. Here I show such explanations are unnecessary, and further, why current counterarguments focussed on scientific evidence may not only be ineffective, but may backfire. I highlight that denialist arguments focusing on credibility-based attacks can provoke rational scepticism of the issue at hand, requiring a shift in counterargument strategy – away from the evidence itself. I show the maximally effective counterargument strategy is to separately and directly address credibility-attacks, salvaging both the immediate issue, and future debate.


Author(s):  
JAMIE DRAPER

Social scientific evidence suggests that labor migration can increase resilience to climate change. For that reason, some have recently advocated using labor migration policy as a tool for climate adaptation. This paper engages with the normative question of whether, and under what conditions, states may permissibly use labor migration policy as a tool for climate adaptation. I argue that states may use labor migration policy as a tool for climate adaptation and may even have a duty to do so, subject to two moral constraints. First, states must also provide acceptable alternative options for adaptation so that the vulnerable are not forced to sacrifice their morally important interests in being able to remain where they are. Second, states may not impose restrictive terms on labor migrants to make accepting greater numbers less costly for themselves because doing so unfairly shifts the costs of adaptation onto the most vulnerable.


2014 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 73-99
Author(s):  
Mohammad Khalil Elahee

The challenge of global climate change requires a radical change in our understanding of environmental issues, for its causes are linked to our dominant development model and its impact is significant at the grassroots level. Addressing energy production and consumption remains at the heart of any feasible solution. In this article, I define energy management (EM) as a systemic and systematic endeavor to optimize energy use through engineering and management tools in order to achieve political, economic, and environmental objectives. I also discuss what underpins EM’s ethical dimension, focusing on sustainability, and critically analyze the Islamic perspective to elaborate a value-based, universally acceptable, realistically applicable, and objective environmental ethic. By using EM as a vehicle toward sustainability, hence addressing climate change, I evaluate the outcomes of such a radical change in our understanding of environmental issues. I conclude by investigating whether a difference in vision with regard to faith and the hereafter can hinder a common engagement. Evidence is also sought from relevant specialist studies by non-Muslims, in which such Islamic principles as ordering the good and prohibiting the evil, ijmā‘, istiḥsān, istiṣḥāb, or istiṣlāḥhave been implemented to a given extent in all but name.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zofeen Ebrahim

This booklet narrates the stories of five female journalists from Pakistan who are working on environment- and climate-change-related issues. Women are being disproportionately and adversely impacted by climate change and female journalists are uniquely placed to understand and share their stories. However, these journalists are ‘missing in action’ from the media in sharing their experiences of environmental activism and climate action. The publication covers a range of challenges journalists face, from limitations on mobility and harassment, to gender-based discrimination in media houses. It highlights why environmental issues sometimes make headlines while remaining dormant at others.


2008 ◽  
Vol 127 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-81
Author(s):  
Kitty van Vuuren ◽  
Libby Lester

The prominence of media events in 2006, including the release of former US Vice President Al Gore's documentary An Inconvenient Truth, the publication of the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change, the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, even the death of ‘eco-celebrity’ Steve Irwin, suggested a need to devote an issue of Media International Australia to media and the environment. The study of environmentalism through the lens of media, journalism and communication is all but absent in Australia, with some notable exceptions. This issue of MIA goes some way towards redressing the absences identified by Tom Jagtenberg and David McKie in their influential book Eco-Impacts and the Greening of Postmodernity, published more than 10 years ago, which claimed for the environment an equal status with traditional research foci: class, race and gender. The current public interest in environmental issues emphasises this point, although it is not unprecedented. History shows that environmental issues move in waves to and from the heart of public debate. As well as showcasing some of the field's distinct approaches and traditions, the articles in this issue contribute to a better understanding of this current wave and its likely aftermath. In doing so, it goes some way towards moving the environment in the direction of a more central position on the research and public agenda.


2018 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 231-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martín José Montero-Martínez ◽  
Julio Sergio Santana-Sepúlveda ◽  
Naydú Isabel Pérez-Ortiz ◽  
Óscar Pita-Díaz ◽  
Salvador Castillo-Liñan

Abstract. It is a matter of current study to determine potential climate changes in different parts of the world, especially in regions like a basin which has the potential to affect socioeconomic and environmental issues in a defined area. This study provides a comparison between several climate change indices trends of two very different basins in Mexico, one located in the northern arid region (the Conchos River basin) and the other in the southern humid area (the Usumacinta River basin). First, quality control, homogenization, and completion of the missing data were applied before calculating the climate change indices and their respective trends for the combined period 1961–1994. A clear warming signal was found for the two basins in addition to an increment in the DTR, in agreement with other studies in Mexico. Also, the Conchos River basin was found to be more humid and the Usumacinta River basin drier, in accordance to a supposed seesaw behavior indicated in previous analysis.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alasdair Neilson

This paper seeks to highlight the importance of metaphors for marine conservation and policy. It argues that themanner in which the oceans are perceived, often as an alien landscape, can limit the way language is utilised inmarine conservation efforts. This limitation can produce unhelpful environmental metaphors that, instead ofacting as catalysts for action, produce negative and reactionary responses. It illustrates this point through theexample of what has become known as the ‘Great Pacific Garbage Patch.’ It postulates that if there is a disconnectbetween the many complex environmental issues facing the world's oceans and the way they are perceived, thenmore focus should be placed on developing pre-determined culturally embedded metaphors, which can conjurerelatable imagery, but that are also rooted in scientific evidence. It recommends that, in an extension to existingpublic perception research (PPR) on how different communities value the ocean environment, there is room forshared metaphors of the oceanic environment to be developed that can help raise awareness within a particularcultural setting.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document