ClimBEco PhD course Module 1 session 3

ClimBEco PhD course Module 1 session 3

• 1.
  Scales in EnvironmentalGovernance Session 3: between bottom-up and top-down Dr. Joshka Wessels
• 2.
  Collective action, Democracy,States and Environmental Peacebuilding • Collective action is often approached as an economic concept • Democracy as a primary condition for sustainable development • Strong focus on statebuilding • Environment as a transnational responsibility between States
• 3.
  Collective Action The theoreticaldebate of collective action for the commons started in 1965 with the publication of “The Logic of Collective Action” by Mancur Olson followed by Garret Hardin’s monumental 1968 article “The Tragedy of the Commons” in Science (Uphoff, 1996; Ostrom, 2000; Dietz, Th., 2002; Kurian, 2003).
• 4.
  Collective Action Olson &Hardin: “No selfinterested person would contribute to the production of a public good “unless the number of individuals in a group is quite small, or unless there is coercion or some other special device to make individuals act in their common interest” (Ostrom, 2000; Kurian, 2003).
• 5.
  Collective Action Using agame theoretical model to illustrate the complexities of the tension between individual and collective best interest, Hardin pointed out how self-interest exhausts the earth’s resources and threatens the effectiveness of community-based natural resource management (Uphoff, 1996; Ostrom, 1990, 2000; Gillinson, 2004).
• 6.
  Collective Action Ecototalitarians: “Olson-Hardin” viewpoint with a negative view on people’s ability to cooperate for the commons and a strong belief in the dominance of self-interest. Ecopopulists: Human cooperation with a somewhat naive belief in human’s natural tendency for altruism. And anything in between this spectrum of ultimate Selfishness and Altruism
• 7.
  Neoliberalism • 1938 AlexanderRustow • Anti-capitalist, anti-communist, Third Way • Post-WW2 Germany: socialist market economy • Democratization • Rule of Law • Rationalism, economic development, markets, increase of “purchasing power” • Seeking to transfer control of the economy from public to private sector
• 8.
  Critics to neoliberalism •Amartya Sen (wellfare economics and social choice) • Noam Chomsky (linguistics and cognitive theory) • David Harvey (anthropology and social theory) Collective action as “a process of individuals acting together to reach a common end” does not take place in a vacuum and the enabling environment is defined here as the “complex of multiple environments in which the collective action takes place” (McCay, 2002)
• 9.
  Inter or multi-disciplinary? In the inter-disciplinary polarisation of things and people, quantification and judgement are opposites; hard physics have a high status, with things as its subject matter. Economics comes next, quantifying and dealing with people as numbers and their behaviour as describable in laws, design principles and equations; the other social sciences, dealing with the greater complexities, diversity and uncontrollability of people, have lower status, with social work lowest of all (Chambers, 1998, 2005).
• 10.
  “New” Ecology “a morecultural and historical approach in human ecology sees “commons” questions as ones about competition and collaboration among social entities; the embeddedness of individual and social action; and the historical, political, sociocultural, and ecological specificity of human environment interactions and institutions” (McCay, 2002).
• 11.
  Post-modernism and reflexivity Framesof reference, perception and behaviour Alternative value orientation (adapted from Uphoff, 1996)
• 12.
  Perception and framesof reference The actor’s willingness to cooperate depends on his or her perception on the relation between self and other and the changes in state of mind during the execution of the collective action. It is assumed that Uphoff’s continuum can be used to monitor actors’ individual behaviour at the various stages of collective action. Considerations of framing, lifestyle, social relationships, conflicts of loyalties and interests, change in power and status are taken into account.
• 13.
  Cognitive Theory vs.Rational Choice • Ostrom’s (1990) emphasis on economic benefit of cooperation, collective action and resource management • Focus on technical and financial profit • Dimensions of the challenges of “working together” – humans as political beings • Flaws and paradoxes
• 14.
  Cognitive Theory vs.Rational Choice Eric Stern (1999, 2003) characteristics of decisionmaking in environmental crisis: •Threat to basic values •Urgency •Uncertainty
• 15.
  Cognitive Theory vs.Rational Choice • Increased relevance of empathy • Perception of “the other” • Altruism vs. Selfishness • Power and politics • Context
• 16.
  Environmental Peacebuilding “Environmental cooperationcan be an effective catalyst for reducing tensions, broadening cooperation, fostering demilitarization and promoting peace” (Conca & Dabelko, 2002).
• 17.
  Democratization • Values andnorms • Human rights • Freedom of speech • Transparency • Accountability • Leadership • Responsibility
• 18.
  Democracy, environment andpeace • Holistic • Religious • Nostalgia to the past • The balance is disrupted • Good governance • The three legged African stool analogy
• 19.
  Wangari Maathai 30 milliontrees for peace
• 20.
  “Today we arefaced with a challenge that calls for a shift in our thinking, so that humanity stops threatening its life-support system. We are called to assist the Earth to heal her wounds and in the process heal our own - indeed to embrace the whole of creation in all its diversity, beauty and wonder. Recognizing that sustainable development, democracy and peace are indivisible is an idea whose time has come” Wangari Maathai
• 21.
  https://mukuyu.wordpress.com/tag/three-stones/
• 22.
  • Good management ofnatural resources • Equitable distribution of natural resources • Sense of accountability ENVIRONMENT • Non-violence • Communication • Respect differences PEACE • Good Government • Democracy • Dignity DEMOCRACY DEVELOPMENT
• 23.
  Change as theonly constant: scales and a chair Developments in quantum physics and postmodern paradigms provide further theoretical reflections on ecosystems ecology (Uphoff, 1996). The evolving intellectual debate on parallels between social science, ecosystems and quantum physics looks at the dynamics of human-environment interaction. Parallel to the Heracliteian “panta rei”, everything flows and is constantly changing, we observe everything is in constant movement. You could say the same of a traditional society that seems static from afar but observed closely at various spatio-temporal levels is very dynamic. Nothing is static whether it concerns biophysical or social phenomena.
• 24.
  Change as theonly constant: scales and a chair It is a question of scale; an ecosystem might seem static or in “equilibrium” when looked at from a distance, but the closer you look, the more dynamic it becomes until at micro level the elements of the wider system are continuously changing and exchanging, similar to a chair that looks static from the outside but at quantum physical level its quarks are showing the relative dynamics of the chair.
• 25.
  Scaled and nestedhierarchies
• 26.
  Climate change governanceat global level • The global ecosystem and climate is changing • Observed rapid and large scale changes human induced • Global collective action needed to counter the process • International consensus and agreement • Implementation of mitigation or adaptation policies • Treaties and pledges, global conferences of nations • Strategic interests world superpowers and “Global South”