Dear GEP-eders,
Please see below - another last minute call for abstracts for ISA 2018 and let 
me know if you have something you’d like to present by Wednesday next week.

All the best,

Hannah

Comparison in Global Environmental Politics: Knowing the future from the past
Panel discussant: Paul Steinberg
This panel seeks to explore how comparison is being used as a method in Global 
Environmental Politics (GEP). It aims to identify different approaches to 
comparing international environmental issue areas, policies, organisations and 
countries. In particular, it aims to examine how we might use established and 
emerging comparative methodologies to explore the future from experiences of 
the past. The one thing we surely know within the study of GEP is that the 
future cannot follow the same pathway as the past and that unless we transform 
our understanding and social and political relationship to the Earth, there 
will be nothing to sustain the future. As recent contributions demonstrate, 
comparison is a central methodological resource within the study of GEP for 
achieving this (Steinberg and VanDeever 2012; Purdon 2015). This panel aims to 
identify and bring together what is being learned and developed through these 
approaches in order to share what is relevant for understanding future 
directions and supporting the necessary transitions to an environmentally sound 
future.

Researching Decarbonization in Future Time: Connecting Political Processes and 
System Trajectories
Steven Bernstein and Matthew Hoffmann
A fundamental problem with researching the politics and possibilities of 
decarbonization is that classic social science research designs are rendered 
problematic (if not useless) because of three key characteristics. First, there 
are no significant cases of decarbonization to compare to negative cases where 
decarbonization is pursued but is not successful. Second, even defining ‘cases’ 
of decarbonization is profoundly difficult because the carbon lock in that 
decarbonization efforts are designed to disrupt exists simultaneously at many 
levels and realms of action (political jurisdictions, markets and practices)—it 
is both a diffuse global phenomenon and a discrete local phenomenon. Finally, 
decarbonization can potentially flow from both intentional actions and 
unintended effects of actions taken for other reasons. Methodological 
innovation is thus necessary and in this paper we explore a way to empirically 
study decarbonization politics by defining and describing intervention 
trajectories and potentials. Unlike approaches that focus on hypothetical 
scenarios or backcast from desired outcomes, we begin by empirically examining 
the political effects of conscious decarbonization interventions. This 
empirical research, which can be done with classic social science methods, then 
becomes the foundation for forward theorizing and conceptualization of 
intervention trajectories—a way to assess the potential for decarbonization in 
specific places and for more widespread impact. We illustrate this method with 
examples of diverse decarbonization interventions.

Comparing organisational histories: learning from IPCC and IPBES
Hannah Hughes and Alice Vadrot
This article seeks to compare the historical establishment of two 
organisations, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the 
Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity (IPBES). However, rather than using 
comparison to identify the similarities and differences or determine the 
relative effectiveness of these bodies, the purpose of our comparison is to 
draw out some of the difficulties that IPBES is likely to face in positioning 
itself centrally to global biodiversity politics. While the IPCC is now firmly 
positioned as the central knowledge producer within the climate field, it has 
undergone considerable struggle and competition with member governments, 
intergovernmental organisations, academic actors and contesters of climate 
science. These forces and the organisation’s response have structured its 
organisational form and assessment practice. The aim of this study is to 
explore what these experiences can offer in terms of understanding IPBES now 
and what the future may hold for this organisation as a central knowledge 
producer in and to global biodiversity politics.

Y Dr Hannah Hughes
Darlithydd mewn Cysylltiadau Rhyngwladol
Ysgol y Gyfraith a Gwleidyddiaeth
Prifysgol Caerdydd
CF10 3AX
E-bost: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Ffôn: +44 (0)29 2088 8820


Dr Hannah Hughes
Lecturer in International Relations
School of Law and Politics
Cardiff University
CF10 3AX
Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Phone: +44 (0)29 2088 8820






-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"gep-ed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to