Search results

The 'socioenvironmental state' conceptualisation probes how contested, shifting, emergent boundaries of the state contain the possibilities for transformative change in the Anthropocene. The paper outlines a research programme capable of addressing the questions: who becomes authorised to govern change, who is required to make changes on the ground, and what subjectivities and pathways emerge in the context of rapid rate change? The conceptualisation unpacks three boundaries: state– society, its socionatural emergence, and the relationships between boundary-making and belonging to address these questions and better account for the successes and failures of attempts at governing an uncertain, rapidly changing world. In this analysis, 'environmental change' arises as a stochastic, relational becoming – ecologies and resources are emergent with the social-politics of governing them – suggesting that more analytical attention is required on how 'environmental challenges' and their 'drivers of change' are conceived and delimited. Together, these theoretical insights help reveal the way that the micro-politics of local resource use and the contradictory acceptance and refusals of authority and subjection are not only products of, but also productive of, larger scale political economies, socionatures, governance, and political struggles. The aim is to contribute towards a reimagination of political authority that begins to capture the complex interplay between our attempts at governing a changing world and the inadvertent authorisations, inclusions, and exclusions that we produce in those efforts. The paper partially illustrates the conceptual ideas with an account of forestry and climate change in Nepal. In a context wherein programmes to govern resources have become of global concern, probing the implications of these points is crucial. It is not only that states govern resources with particular consequences for 'environmental change' or 'sustainability', but also that the act of governing resources (re)produces the socioenvironmental boundaries of the state with profound implications for how future transformations can unfold.

This paper explores the relational emergence of subjects, emotions, and socionatures and their consequences for Scottish inshore fishery management. Using a conception of the embodied spatial production of individual and collective subjectivities, and the 'ambivalence' of the subject, I explore why some fishers are committed to sustaining the fishing ground and others are not. Many people who work the land or the sea have a deep respect for and attachment to those environments, but overexploit them to make a living. How is it that people whose livelihoods depend on 'natural' environments embody apparently contradictory relationships with those environments? I probe such contradictions by exploring how the boundaries between subjects and environments are formed, and the consequences for Scottish inshore fisheries management of such boundary un/making. Using work from socionature, subjectivity, and emotional geographies, I show how fishing subjectivities are highly political and produce emotional and practical responses that have real consequences for how fisheries management plays out. Attending to the way in which subjectivities position fishers differently in relation to their resources and fisheries policies is therefore vital for successful management.

From the Foundations in Global Studies series, this student-friendly text follows a two-pronged approach to help readers understand the globalizing processes relating to environment and sustainability, which are examined in a range of disciplines, including environmental studies, geography, global studies, political science, international affairs, comparative politics, and other disciplines. First, it presents foundational material that gives students the conceptual underpinnings required for rigorous analysis. Following the Introduction and Overview, Part One presents a brief historical overview of the concerns revolving around environmental sustainability in the modern era. The textthen covers key concepts and theoretical constructs that define the global context for sustainable environmental practices, such as the key thinkers and theories pertaining to sustainable environmental practice, and the key international agencies and treaties involved in global discussions. The first part then explores the various models and ways to measure sustainability, the range of environmental domains at play in the sustainability dialogue, and the controversies surrounding them. Part Twoemploys case studies to examine theory and practice at work in particular situations. The case studies have been selected with an eye toward comprehensiveness of coverage across disciplines and across regions.

As a response to the march of privatization and neoliberal individualism, the commons have recently re-emerged as an attractive alternative. In this article, I bring a feminist political ecology critique to the burgeoning literature on commoning to develop a conceptualisation of how political communities of commoning emerge through socionatural subjectification and affective relations. All commoning efforts involve a renegotiation of the (contested) political relationships through which everyday community affairs, production and exchange are organised and governed. Drawing on critical property studies, diverse economies, feminist theory and commoning literatures, the analysis critically explores the relationship between property and commoning to reveal how the commons emerge from the exercise of power. Central to my conceptualisation is that commoning is a set of practices and performances that foster new relations and subjectivities, but these relations are always contingent, ambivalent, outcomes of the exercise of power. As such, commoning creates socionatural inclusions and exclusions, and any moment of coming together can be succeeded by new challenges and relations that un-common. I argue for the need to focus on doing commoning, becoming in common, rather than seeking to cement property rights, relations of sharing and collective practices as the backbone of durable commoning efforts. Becoming in common then, is a partial, transitory becoming, one which needs to be (re)performed to remain stable over time and space.

Clearly, Nepalis have to adapt to climate change. It is less clear what precisely the challenges are and who is best positioned to lead the response.

Clearly, Nepalis have to adapt to climate change. It is less clear what precisely the challenges are and who is best positioned to lead the response.

Building on Liverman's critique of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), I argue SDGs must be conceptualized as situated by (i) unpacking the black box of social, political and intellectual consensus behind indicators and (ii) reimagining development goals as dynamic performances that are uneven over time and space for both populations and individuals. Poverty, justice and other targets of SDGs are not a state of being but rather a punctuated experience for the individuals and populations in question. For the SDGs to be effective, they need to go beyond simple statistics to account for how situated, performative aspects of lives evolve, rather than as they are.

Power and politics have been central topics from the early days of Political Ecology. There are different and sometimes conflicting conceptualizations of power in this field that portray power alternatively as a resource, personal attribute or relation. The aim of this article is to contribute to theorizations of power by probing contesting views regarding its role in societal change and by presenting a specific conceptualization of power, one which draws on political ecology and sociotechnical approaches in science and technology studies. We review how power has been conceptualized in the political ecology field and identify three trends that shaped current discussions. We then develop our conceptual discussion and ask explicitly where power emerges in processes of resource governance projects. We identify four locations that we illustrate empirically through an example of rural electrification in Tanzania that aimed at catalyzing social and economic development by providing renewable energy-based electricity services. Our analysis supports the argument that power is relational and productive, and it draws on science and technology studies to bring to the fore the critical role of non-human elements in co-constitution of society – technology – nature. This leads us to see the exercise of power as having contradictory and ambiguous effects. We conclude that by exploring the tension between human agency and constitutive power, we keep the politics alive throughout the analysis and are able to show why intentional choices and actions really matter for how resource governance projects play out in everyday life.

Feminist approaches to multi-scalar, more-than-human, power and politics pushes critical agrarian studies in novel directions. Gender-nature-body are critical sites for realignments of social, material and political relations, resulting in uneven access to and control over resources. Gender, race, class and other forms of intersectional socionatural relations are foundational to agrarian studies concerns such as class formation, collective action, extractivism and land grabs. The chapter reframes agrarian conflicts as the material and emotional outcomes of embodied, differentiated responses to enclosure and commodification, linking scales from the global economy to the uneven conditions of peoples' lives to illuminate spaces of transformation.

Power and politics have been central topics from the early days of Political Ecology. There are different and sometimes conflicting conceptualizations of power in this field that portray power alternatively as a resource, personal attribute or relation. The aim of this article is to contribute to theorizations of power by probing contesting views regarding its role in societal change and by presenting a specific conceptualization of power, one which draws on political ecology and sociotechnical approaches in science and technology studies. We review how power has been conceptualized in the political ecology field and identify three trends that shaped current discussions. We then develop our conceptual discussion and ask explicitly where power emerges in processes of resource governance projects. We identify four locations that we illustrate empirically through an example of rural electrification in Tanzania that aimed at catalyzing social and economic development by providing renewable energy-based electricity services. Our analysis supports the argument that power is relational and productive, and it draws on science and technology studies to bring to the fore the critical role of non-human elements in co-constitution of society – technology – nature. This leads us to see the exercise of power as having contradictory and ambiguous effects. We conclude that by exploring the tension between human agency and constitutive power, we keep the politics alive throughout the analysis and are able to show why intentional choices and actions really matter for how resource governance projects play out in everyday life.