Search

Calls for humanity to act on environmental changes are becoming increasingly critical. The growing polycrisis including the impact of ongoing conflicts in contested geopolitical spaces and the struggles for ways to sustain a livelihood in areas of precarity and poverty, are just some of the intersecting challenges which have given rise to a Code Red alarm by the United Nations surrounding issues related to climate change. Rich narratives and stories of climate actions from Africa offer examples of potential paths. This paper explores how such narratives inform local development and climate action. A key message is that stories and narratives, created by various peoples, disciplines, and systems of knowledge, can all be powerful genres and sources for agentic change that can inspire and embolden development practice and action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ever since climate change became a political issue in the late 1980s, a number of industry coalitions have formed to oppose mandatory carbon emissions reductions. One key coalition was the Global Climate Coalition (GCC). This paper conducts a historical and empirical review of the activities of this coalition. This review shows that the GCC engaged in four distinct activities to obstruct climate action: 1) monitoring and contesting climate science, 2) commissioning and utilizing economic studies to amplify and legitimate their arguments, 3) shifting the cultural understanding of climate change through public relations campaigns and 4) conducting aggressive lobbying of political elites. Through these activities, the GCC played an important role in obstructing climate action, both in the U.S. and internationally. Further analysis of similar coalitions can aid in our understanding of the organized opposition to climate action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In spite of solid scientific evidence that anthropogenic climate change will affect the conditions for life on earth, little climate action is taking place. This paper discusses this apparent paradox. The main message is that lack of climate action has to do with the ways in which climate change interlinks with society. Climate change is representative of what in the paper is defined as 'modern environmental problems'. Unlike 'traditional' environmental problems, 'modern' environmental problems are 'internal' to society and are 'societal' problems as much as they are environmental problems. The paper discusses how climate change must be understood in an overlapping interface between nature and society, and based on this theoretical analysis the paper discusses a number of contradictions and paradoxes illuminating the problems of linking knowledge and climate action. The concluding section calls for new methodological approaches to linking knowledge and climate action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the 1990s, regionalisation in England held out the promise that regions could forge their own unique policies to address climate change. This paper considers the Yorkshire & Humber region's climate change action plan. The study uses critical discourse to analyse the plan and a series of interviews with those who helped develop the initiative. It shows that in the case of Yorkshire & Humber, the Regional Development Agency was a key player in shaping the policies. This resulted in a focus on un-proven large-scale technological projects to mitigate climate change and create significant economic development for the region. Little came of this. The need to maintain economic growth seriously undermined the drive to reduce carbon emissions. The findings suggest that the proposed new sub-national governance arrangements will face similar problems in which short-term economic drivers outweigh efforts to reduce carbon emissions. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In this paper we investigate the relation between knowledge and political action, focusing on knowledge claims stemming from science that at the same time have relevance in a policy context. In so doing, we will revisit some well-known and some lesser known approaches, such as C.P. Snow's thesis of the two cultures and Mannheim's conceptualization of theory and practice. We arrive at a distinction between knowledge for practice and practical knowledge, which we briefly apply to the case of climate change science and policy. We state as our thesis that policy is ever more reliant on knowledge, but science can deliver ever less certainty. Political decisions and programs have to recognize this fact, either implicitly or explicitly. This creates a paradox that is normally resolved through the political decision and not the dissemination of “truth” in the sense of uncontested knowledge. We use the case of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as an example. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]