Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2012
The current institutional framework for sustainable development is not strong enough to bring abo... more The current institutional framework for sustainable development is not strong enough to bring about the swift transformative progress that is needed. This paper contends that incrementalism-the main approach since the 1972 Stockholm Conference-will not suffice to bring about societal change at the level and speed needed to mitigate and adapt to earth system transformation. Instead, the paper argues that transformative structural change in global governance is needed, and that the 2012 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro must turn into a major stepping stone for a much stronger institutional framework for sustainable development. The article details core areas where urgent action is required. The article is based on an extensive social science assessment conducted by 32 members of the lead faculty, scientific steering committee, and other affiliates of the Earth System Governance Project. EARTH System governance working paper No. 17 | 3 Series Foreword This working paper was written as part of the Earth System Governance Project, a tenyear research initiative launched in October 2008 by the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change under the overall auspices of the Earth System Science Partnership. Earth system governance is defined in this Project as the system of formal and informal rules, rule-making mechanisms and actor-networks at all levels of human society (from local to global) that are set up to prevent, mitigate and adapt to environmental change and earth system transformation. The science plan of the Project focusses on five analytical problems: the problems of the overall architecture of earth system governance, of agency of and beyond the state, of the adaptiveness of governance mechanisms and processes, of their accountability and legitimacy, and of modes of allocation and access in earth system governance. In addition, the Project emphasizes four crosscutting research themes that are crucial for the study of each analytical problem: the role of power, of knowledge, of norms, and of scale. Finally, the Earth System Governance Project advances the integrated analysis of case study domains in which researchers combine analysis of the analytical problems and crosscutting themes. The main case study domains are at present the global water system, global food systems, the global climate system, and the global economic system. The Earth System Governance Project is designed as the nodal point within the global change research programmes to guide, organize and evaluate research on these questions. The Project is implemented through a Global Alliance of Earth System Governance Research Centres, a network of lead faculty members and research fellows, a global conference series, and various research projects undertaken at multiple levels (see www.earthsystemgovernance.org).
Amid talk of the need for a low carbon 'clean energy revolution' to address the challenges of ene... more Amid talk of the need for a low carbon 'clean energy revolution' to address the challenges of energy poverty and climate change, there is growing academic and policy interest in understanding the role of key actors that are expected to enable transitions and transformations towards a low carbon economy in a pro-poor way. Within the socio-technical transitions literature, there has been increased interest in "the state" as the primary actor with the responsibility, authority and capacity to address these issues. But understanding the role of the state in energy transformations requires an appreciation of context: what is possible given enormous differences in capacity and resources, autonomy and uneven access to different energy sources and technologies. Which technologies and energy systems receive support, whose energy needs get prioritised and which actors are charged with the responsibility for meeting energy needs are a function of very different decision-making processes, political systems and political economies. Taking the case of support to solar PV in China and Kenya, we develop a political economy analysis of state-led energy transformations which seeks to explore how different aspects of statehood impact upon the nature and prospects of the sorts of transformations now urgently required of energy systems. We do so by examining political economy dynamics in relation to: (i) the organisation of the state; (ii) the political nature of the state; and (iii) the state in the global political economy. This raises questions about the viability and desirability of generic prescriptions for "managed transitions" in light of such diversity in state forms and functions, the different ways in which they interact with energy systems and the evident limits of the sorts of transitions and transformations that states alone can steer, manage or impose. It thus speaks to broader debates about the politics of "care" vs. "control" in transformations to sustainability.
In this Perspective, we suggest that research on just transitions and energy justice needs to bet... more In this Perspective, we suggest that research on just transitions and energy justice needs to better attend to the increasingly important trade-offs arising from issues related to speed and acceleration of low-carbon transitions. We identify and elaborate two important tensions that policymakers face when they want to simultaneously achieve both just and rapid low-carbon transitions. First, the way in which participatory processes may increase justice but slow the speed of action; and second the way in which incumbent mobilization can accelerate transitions but entrench injustices. Such an analysis shifts the focus from mapping justice dimensions to acknowledging the inevitable trade-offs and winners and losers produced by transition processes as a first step to better navigating them.
If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination... more If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination, volume/issue, and date of publication details. And where the final published version is provided on the Research Portal, if citing you are again advised to check the publisher's website for any subsequent corrections.
Non-technical summary box (100 word max) Scaling sustainable behaviour change means addressing po... more Non-technical summary box (100 word max) Scaling sustainable behaviour change means addressing politics, power and social justice to tackle the uneven distribution of responsibility and agency for climate action, within and between societies. This requires a holistic understanding of behaviour that bridges the 'individual' and 'systemic', and acknowledges the need for absolute emissions reductions, especially by high-consuming groups, and in key 'hotspots' of polluting activity, namely, travel, diet and housing. It counters the dominant focus on individuals and households, in favour of a differentiated, but collective approach, driven by bold climate governance and social mobilisation to reorient institutions and behaviour towards just transitions, sufficiency and wellbeing. Technical summary box (200 word max) Sustainable behaviour change has been rising up the climate policy agenda as it becomes increasingly clear that far-reaching changes in lifestyles will be required, alongside shifts in policy, service provision and technological innovation, if we are to avoid dangerous levels of global heating. In this paper, we review different approaches to behaviour change from economics, psychology, sociology and political economy, to explore the neglected question of scalability, and identify critical points of leverage that challenge the dominant emphasis on individual responsibility. Although politically contentious and challenging to implement, in order to achieve the ambitious target of keeping warming below 1.5 degrees, we propose urgent structural interventions are necessary at all points within an ecosystem of transformation, and highlight five key spheres for action: a 'strong' sustainability pathway; pursuing just transitions (via changes to work, income and infrastructure); rebalancing political institutions to expand spaces for citizens vis-à-vis elite incumbents; focusing on high polluting actors and activities; and supporting social mobilisation. We call for a move away from linear and 'shallow' understandings of behaviour change, dominated by traditional behavioural and mainstreaming approaches, towards a 'deep', contextualised and dynamic view of scaling as a transformative process of multiple feedbacks and learning loops between individuals and systems, engaged in a mutually reinforcing 'spiral of sustainability'.
Making Climate Compatible Development Happen, 2017
Funding for this research from the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) is gratefully... more Funding for this research from the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) is gratefully acknowledged. CDKN is funded by the UK Department for International Development (DfID) and the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs (DGIS).
Abstract This chapter assesses the effectiveness of different approaches to the regulation of the... more Abstract This chapter assesses the effectiveness of different approaches to the regulation of the social and environmental risks associated with genetically modified (GM) crops. It is argued that public regulation at the national, regional and international level suffers from a ...
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2012
The current institutional framework for sustainable development is not strong enough to bring abo... more The current institutional framework for sustainable development is not strong enough to bring about the swift transformative progress that is needed. This paper contends that incrementalism-the main approach since the 1972 Stockholm Conference-will not suffice to bring about societal change at the level and speed needed to mitigate and adapt to earth system transformation. Instead, the paper argues that transformative structural change in global governance is needed, and that the 2012 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in Rio de Janeiro must turn into a major stepping stone for a much stronger institutional framework for sustainable development. The article details core areas where urgent action is required. The article is based on an extensive social science assessment conducted by 32 members of the lead faculty, scientific steering committee, and other affiliates of the Earth System Governance Project. EARTH System governance working paper No. 17 | 3 Series Foreword This working paper was written as part of the Earth System Governance Project, a tenyear research initiative launched in October 2008 by the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change under the overall auspices of the Earth System Science Partnership. Earth system governance is defined in this Project as the system of formal and informal rules, rule-making mechanisms and actor-networks at all levels of human society (from local to global) that are set up to prevent, mitigate and adapt to environmental change and earth system transformation. The science plan of the Project focusses on five analytical problems: the problems of the overall architecture of earth system governance, of agency of and beyond the state, of the adaptiveness of governance mechanisms and processes, of their accountability and legitimacy, and of modes of allocation and access in earth system governance. In addition, the Project emphasizes four crosscutting research themes that are crucial for the study of each analytical problem: the role of power, of knowledge, of norms, and of scale. Finally, the Earth System Governance Project advances the integrated analysis of case study domains in which researchers combine analysis of the analytical problems and crosscutting themes. The main case study domains are at present the global water system, global food systems, the global climate system, and the global economic system. The Earth System Governance Project is designed as the nodal point within the global change research programmes to guide, organize and evaluate research on these questions. The Project is implemented through a Global Alliance of Earth System Governance Research Centres, a network of lead faculty members and research fellows, a global conference series, and various research projects undertaken at multiple levels (see www.earthsystemgovernance.org).
Amid talk of the need for a low carbon 'clean energy revolution' to address the challenges of ene... more Amid talk of the need for a low carbon 'clean energy revolution' to address the challenges of energy poverty and climate change, there is growing academic and policy interest in understanding the role of key actors that are expected to enable transitions and transformations towards a low carbon economy in a pro-poor way. Within the socio-technical transitions literature, there has been increased interest in "the state" as the primary actor with the responsibility, authority and capacity to address these issues. But understanding the role of the state in energy transformations requires an appreciation of context: what is possible given enormous differences in capacity and resources, autonomy and uneven access to different energy sources and technologies. Which technologies and energy systems receive support, whose energy needs get prioritised and which actors are charged with the responsibility for meeting energy needs are a function of very different decision-making processes, political systems and political economies. Taking the case of support to solar PV in China and Kenya, we develop a political economy analysis of state-led energy transformations which seeks to explore how different aspects of statehood impact upon the nature and prospects of the sorts of transformations now urgently required of energy systems. We do so by examining political economy dynamics in relation to: (i) the organisation of the state; (ii) the political nature of the state; and (iii) the state in the global political economy. This raises questions about the viability and desirability of generic prescriptions for "managed transitions" in light of such diversity in state forms and functions, the different ways in which they interact with energy systems and the evident limits of the sorts of transitions and transformations that states alone can steer, manage or impose. It thus speaks to broader debates about the politics of "care" vs. "control" in transformations to sustainability.
In this Perspective, we suggest that research on just transitions and energy justice needs to bet... more In this Perspective, we suggest that research on just transitions and energy justice needs to better attend to the increasingly important trade-offs arising from issues related to speed and acceleration of low-carbon transitions. We identify and elaborate two important tensions that policymakers face when they want to simultaneously achieve both just and rapid low-carbon transitions. First, the way in which participatory processes may increase justice but slow the speed of action; and second the way in which incumbent mobilization can accelerate transitions but entrench injustices. Such an analysis shifts the focus from mapping justice dimensions to acknowledging the inevitable trade-offs and winners and losers produced by transition processes as a first step to better navigating them.
If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination... more If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination, volume/issue, and date of publication details. And where the final published version is provided on the Research Portal, if citing you are again advised to check the publisher's website for any subsequent corrections.
Non-technical summary box (100 word max) Scaling sustainable behaviour change means addressing po... more Non-technical summary box (100 word max) Scaling sustainable behaviour change means addressing politics, power and social justice to tackle the uneven distribution of responsibility and agency for climate action, within and between societies. This requires a holistic understanding of behaviour that bridges the 'individual' and 'systemic', and acknowledges the need for absolute emissions reductions, especially by high-consuming groups, and in key 'hotspots' of polluting activity, namely, travel, diet and housing. It counters the dominant focus on individuals and households, in favour of a differentiated, but collective approach, driven by bold climate governance and social mobilisation to reorient institutions and behaviour towards just transitions, sufficiency and wellbeing. Technical summary box (200 word max) Sustainable behaviour change has been rising up the climate policy agenda as it becomes increasingly clear that far-reaching changes in lifestyles will be required, alongside shifts in policy, service provision and technological innovation, if we are to avoid dangerous levels of global heating. In this paper, we review different approaches to behaviour change from economics, psychology, sociology and political economy, to explore the neglected question of scalability, and identify critical points of leverage that challenge the dominant emphasis on individual responsibility. Although politically contentious and challenging to implement, in order to achieve the ambitious target of keeping warming below 1.5 degrees, we propose urgent structural interventions are necessary at all points within an ecosystem of transformation, and highlight five key spheres for action: a 'strong' sustainability pathway; pursuing just transitions (via changes to work, income and infrastructure); rebalancing political institutions to expand spaces for citizens vis-à-vis elite incumbents; focusing on high polluting actors and activities; and supporting social mobilisation. We call for a move away from linear and 'shallow' understandings of behaviour change, dominated by traditional behavioural and mainstreaming approaches, towards a 'deep', contextualised and dynamic view of scaling as a transformative process of multiple feedbacks and learning loops between individuals and systems, engaged in a mutually reinforcing 'spiral of sustainability'.
Making Climate Compatible Development Happen, 2017
Funding for this research from the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) is gratefully... more Funding for this research from the Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) is gratefully acknowledged. CDKN is funded by the UK Department for International Development (DfID) and the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs (DGIS).
Abstract This chapter assesses the effectiveness of different approaches to the regulation of the... more Abstract This chapter assesses the effectiveness of different approaches to the regulation of the social and environmental risks associated with genetically modified (GM) crops. It is argued that public regulation at the national, regional and international level suffers from a ...
The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) forms a key part of the international community’s attempt t... more The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) forms a key part of the international community’s attempt to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but continues to fall short on its promise to provide sustainable development benefits in developing countries. Research by the Governance of Clean Development Project suggests that current reform agendas will do little to rectify this unless important aspects of the politics and governance of clean development are addressed. This briefing outlines the need to change the political relationships that determine who benefits from the CDM, which go beyond reducing market transaction costs or overhauling the formal institutions of CDM governance. Policies are required that recognise these challenges and create opportunities to drive significant changes in how governance works for both climate and development.
The food and agriculture sector is both a major contributor to climate change and especially vuln... more The food and agriculture sector is both a major contributor to climate change and especially vulnerable to its worst impacts. This means that much is at stake in what is a complex set of contested political dynamics as new governance agendas are rolled out. On one hand, there is a strong push for ‘climate-smart agriculture’ (CSA) and related initiatives in the area of marine resources such as the idea of the blue economy, as an attempt to bring a range of viewpoints together to address the interrelationship between these ecological and economic systems. On the other hand, critics see these strategies as promotion of more of the same kinds of policies that created stress in the climate–food system in the first place. To unpack these issues, this special forum brings together a collection of papers that highlight three overlapping themes that lie at the centre of these debates, yet which have not been fully acknowledged by those implementing CSA initiatives: the role of power and interests in shaping governance approaches to climate and food systems; the ways in which existing approaches, primarily those promoting open markets and technology, are reinforced in governance initiatives; and the sidelining of questions of inequality.
The Palgrave Handbook of the International Political Economy of Energy, 2016
This chapter explores competing accounts of the nature and development of carbon markets. We comb... more This chapter explores competing accounts of the nature and development of carbon markets. We combine ideas about the performative nature of carbon markets and the techniques and modes of governance required to allow them to operate with political economy readings of the relations of power which give rise to and characterise them. We do this in order to account for what has been referred to as the ‘zombie’ phenomena: the apparent contradiction between the seeming failure of carbon markets to date and ongoing support for them among state and corporate elites. We cover both the pre-history of carbon markets and their subsequent evolution and what this tells us about the ‘nature’ of market-based responses to climate change more generally.
What is the relationship between the direction and form of an energy transition and the political... more What is the relationship between the direction and form of an energy transition and the political economy within which it is embedded? This paper explores how the nature of (low carbon) energy transitions is strongly influenced by the process of neoliberalisation that shape energy policy in the South. We seek to understand emergent energy transitions and to advance their theorisation through an account of the political economy of energy transition in Kenya. In contrast to the often techno-managerial orientation of literatures on socio-technical transitions, we explore the political terrain upon which competing visions of energy futures and material interests collide and seek to accommodate one another. We develop a political economy account that emphasises the structural and disciplinary power of capital and global institutions to set the terms of transition. This expresses itself in both delimiting the autonomy of state actors and by reconfiguring domestic institutional and social power in ways that shape the distributional politics of transitions.
The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, ... more The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.
If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination... more If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination, volume/issue, and date of publication details. And where the final published version is provided on the Research Portal, if citing you are again advised to check the publisher's website for any subsequent corrections.
There is a strong sense of malaise surrounding climate politics today. This has been created at l... more There is a strong sense of malaise surrounding climate politics today. This has been created at least in part by factors such as the chasm between the scale of action required and the adequacy of current political commitments, stalemate in global negotiations, the low price of carbon, and a growing sense of indifference, if not outright skepticism, amongst the publics of some developed countries about the severity of the threat posed by climate change. Within the policy community these issues are generally treated as different problems each to be overcome on their own terms. Yet, we argue, suggested solutions to these problems hold much in common-a focus on attributing agency, whether in the form of the capacity of institutions or to the behavior of individuals. What is often missing from such accounts of climate politics is a recognition that the problems of how agency is attributed in climate politics, what we might term governance traps, are structural in nature. Rather than focusing on attributing agency to respond to the challenges of governing climate change this requires that we address the conditions through which the challenges of governing climate change arise and which in turn serve to frame agency in particular ways. We suggest that examining the ways in which notions of responsibilities and rights are currently being framed within climate politics provides one way into these dynamics that can open up the critical questions we need to address as we approach the critical Conference of the Parties meeting in Paris in November 2015.
The Institute of Development Studies is one of the world's leading organisations for research, te... more The Institute of Development Studies is one of the world's leading organisations for research, teaching and communications on international development. Founded in 1966, the Institute enjoys an international reputation based on the quality of its work and the rigour with which it applies academic skills to real world challenges. Its purpose is to understand and explain the world, and to try to change it -to influence as well as to inform.
The food and agriculture sector is both a major contributor to climate change and
especially vuln... more The food and agriculture sector is both a major contributor to climate change and especially vulnerable to its worst impacts. This means that much is at stake in what is a complex set of contested political dynamics as new governance agendas are rolled out. On one hand, there is a strong push for ‘climate-smart agriculture’ (CSA) and related initiatives in the area of marine resources such as the idea of the blue economy, as an attempt to bring a range of viewpoints together to address the interrelationship between these ecological and economic systems. On the other hand, critics see these strategies as promotion of more of the same kinds of policies that created stress in the climate–food system in the first place. To unpack these issues, this special forum brings together a collection of papers that highlight three overlapping themes that lie at the centre of these debates, yet which have not been fully acknowledged by those implementing CSA initiatives: the role of power and interests in shaping governance approaches to climate and food systems; the ways in which existing approaches, primarily those promoting open markets and technology, are reinforced in governance initiatives; and the sidelining of questions of inequality.
Uploads
Books by Peter Newell
Papers by Peter Newell
especially vulnerable to its worst impacts. This means that much is at stake in what is
a complex set of contested political dynamics as new governance agendas are rolled
out. On one hand, there is a strong push for ‘climate-smart agriculture’ (CSA) and
related initiatives in the area of marine resources such as the idea of the blue
economy, as an attempt to bring a range of viewpoints together to address the
interrelationship between these ecological and economic systems. On the other hand,
critics see these strategies as promotion of more of the same kinds of policies that
created stress in the climate–food system in the first place. To unpack these issues,
this special forum brings together a collection of papers that highlight three
overlapping themes that lie at the centre of these debates, yet which have not been
fully acknowledged by those implementing CSA initiatives: the role of power and
interests in shaping governance approaches to climate and food systems; the ways in
which existing approaches, primarily those promoting open markets and technology,
are reinforced in governance initiatives; and the sidelining of questions of inequality.