global environmental governance
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

421
(FIVE YEARS 72)

H-INDEX

34
(FIVE YEARS 4)

Author(s):  
Melanie Zurba ◽  
Anastasia Papadopoulos

AbstractGlobal environmental governance (GEG) forums, such as those convened through the United Nations, result in the development of monumental guiding frameworks such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Conference of Parties (COPs) Aichi and post-2020 targets. The ratification of policy frameworks by member and/or signatory states can result in major shifts in environmental policy and decision-making and has major implications for Indigenous communities. In this article, we present systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature on Indigenous participation in GEG forums, and focus on the specific questions: (1) what GEG forums include Indigenous participation and (2) how do Indigenous peoples participate in GEG forums, including how their perspectives and knowledges are framed and/or included/excluded within governance discussions, decisions, and negotiations. We provide a bibliometric analysis of the articles and derive seven inductively determined themes from our review: (1) Critical governance forums and decisions; (2) inclusion and exclusion of Indigenous voices and knowledge in GEG forums; (3) capacity barriers; (4) knowledge hierarchies: inclusion, integration, and bridging; (5) representation and grouping of Indigenous peoples in GEG; (6) need for networks among and between Indigenous peoples and other governance actors; and (7) Indigenous peoples influence on GEG decisions and processes. Our findings can be used to improve GEG forums by contributing to the development strategies that address the barriers and inequities to meaningful and beneficial Indigenous participation and can contribute to future research that is focused on understanding the experiences of Indigenous peoples within GEG forums.


2021 ◽  
pp. 251484862110435
Author(s):  
Eric Nost ◽  
Jenny Elaine Goldstein

Conservationists, governments, and corporations see promise in digital technologies to provide holistic, rapid, and objective information to inform policy, shape investments, and monitor ecosystems. But it is increasingly clear that environmental data does more than simply offer a better view of the planet. This special issue makes a single overarching argument: that we cannot fully understand the current conjuncture in global environmental governance without understanding the platforms, devices, and institutions that comprise environmental data infrastructures. The papers draw together scholarship from political ecology and science and technology studies to demonstrate how data has become a significant site in which contemporary environmental politics are waged and socionatures are materialized. We address: (1) the contested practices of utilizing and maintaining data infrastructures; (2) the ways they are governed and the territorial statecraft they enable; (3) the socionatural materiality they arise within but also produce. The papers in this special issue show that, against its dominant representation, data is material, governed, practiced, and requires praxis. Political ecologists could adopt such an approach to make sense of the emerging ways in which data technologies shape environments and their politics.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (18) ◽  
pp. 10052
Author(s):  
Natalia Aguilar Delgado ◽  
Paola Perez-Aleman

With increased participation of non-state actors in global governance, the inclusion of vulnerable groups in making sustainability regulations remains a relevant challenge requiring more research. Based on an ethnographic study on creating the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-Sharing of biological resources and knowledge, we advance a new multi-dimensional view of inclusion that integrates sustained access, involvement, and influence in the intergovernmental negotiation meetings. We elaborate the concept of decisive spaces, that is, less accessible settings where diverse actors interact in a deliberative way to co-produce recommendations and solutions to an issue that highly influence the regulatory and governance decisions. We argue that the inclusion of vulnerable actors depends on their continuous access to and involvement in these decisive spaces for creating and implementing transnational regulations. Our findings advance the understanding of inclusion for addressing challenges facing transnational governance of environmental, equity, and social justice issues.


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.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nico J. Schrijver

Protagonists of global environmental governance often view the sovereign State as well as the principle of sovereignty as major stumbling blocks for effective environmental conservation and sustainable development. Some even herald the demise of the idea of the sovereign State. However, reality has it differently. Sovereignty is no longer an unqualified concept. Manifold new duties have been imposed upon the sovereign State as a result of the progressive development of international law. Much of the modern international law movement vests States with the responsibility to adopt regulations, to monitor and secure compliance and exercise justice in order to achieve its implementation, whereas supranational global environmental governance has remained notoriously weak. This article examines this proposition by reference to the environmental and developmental role of states in three landmark multilateral treaties: The United Nations Law of the Sea Convention (1982), the Convention on the Conservation of Biological Diversity (1992) and the Paris Agreement on climate change (2015). They demonstrate that sovereignty serves as a key organisational principle for the realization of global values, such as environmental conservation and sustainable development.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document