IPE and the environment in the age of the Anthropocene

Newell, Peter; Lane, R.H.

doi:10.4324/9781315206967-8

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Simangan 2020). Newell and Lane (2017) further argue that we need a more critical IPEE to address the challenges of the Anthropocene, recognizing that productive Anthropocene-related thinking has happened outside of IPEE.…”

Section: Anthropocene: Useful But Not Far Enoughmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our intervention builds on this critical IPEE scholarship that engages with aspects of the systemic, structural processes of capital and how they contribute to global environmental change, even if they do not specifically invoke the term Capitalocene (Dalby 2004;Dalby 2020;Newell & Lane 2017;Albert 2020). Capitalocene, however, adds a specific emphasis to existing IPEE scholarship: "Capitalism is not an economic system; it is not a social system; it is a way of organizing nature" (Moore 2015, 2).…”

Section: Capitalocene and The (Unjust) Organization Of Naturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Capitalocene framework complements critical work in international political economy of the environment (IPEE) by examining the political dimensions of the uneven costs and benefits resulting from how nature and its governance are organized and deeply altered through capitalist systems of production and consumption (Newell & Lane 2017;Paterson 2000;Saurin 2001;Sovacool & Linnér 2016). In line with the emerging recognition of Capitalocene thinking in the social sciences, we argue here that the framework of the Capitalocene could be further integrated into the broader discipline of global environmental politics, and specifically critical work on disasters, in productive ways.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Disaster Making in the Capitalocene

O’Lear¹,

Massé²,

Dickinson³

et al. 2022

Global Environmental Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We live in a new normal of increasing, crosscutting, and shifting patterns of disasters fueled by large-scale environmental change, from floods to wildfires to pandemics. Our intervention in this forum piece makes the case that disasters, and responses to disasters, must be understood within the context of the global political-economic system of capitalism. We situate disasters, their making, and their politics within the Capitalocene and argue that disasters and the physical processes that underpin them are not natural: they are unevenly produced through, and exacerbated by, processes inherent in the capitalist system, with uneven consequences. We suggest that the predominantly technomanagerial approaches to disasters pursued within the neoliberal state and multilateral governance institution system reveal the tensions in addressing the causes of environmental change and the new normal of disasters under capitalism. We argue that through an engagement with the Capitalocene, environmental politics could further contribute to nuanced, critical understandings of disasters and their making in ways that foreground their in/justice implications.

show abstract

Section: Anthropocene: Useful But Not Far Enoughmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Capitalocene and The (Unjust) Organization Of Naturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Disaster Making in the Capitalocene

O’Lear¹,

Massé²,

Dickinson³

et al. 2022

Global Environmental Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Climate conflict (Nordås and Gleditsch 2007;Hsiang and Burke 2014) and wider questions of 'climate security' (though the content of this varies, see McDonald 2013) have also attracted attention, emphasising the anarchic backdrop to climate politics or its tendency to be drawn into security politics. Finally, another smaller, but growing, cluster of research focuses on the role of political economy, the international system and nonhuman nature (Malm and Hornborg 2014;Moore 2015;Newell and Lane 2017), emphasising historical materialist themes in social, technological and ecological interactions (Corry 2020).…”

Section: Box 62 Stratospheric Aerosol Injectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geoengineering: A New Arena of International Politics

Corry

Kornbech

2021

International Relations in the Anthropocene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ever-rising concentration of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the atmosphere and the seeming reluctance or inability to effectively address drivers of emissions has led some to search for new technological interventions to deal with global warming. Known collectively as 'geoengineering' or 'climate engineering', such methods are usually defined as large-scale intentional inventions in Earth systems for climate purposes (Shepherd 2009). Some are designed to artificially cool the planet by reducing incoming sunlight, for example by injecting sulphur in the lower stratosphere, while others seek to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and store them, either via intervening in ecosystems or directly through human-built machinery. All are interventions conceived to act after excess emissions have accumulated into the atmosphere, rather than tools to prevent or adapt to such emissions. As such, optimists see in them a possible escape from the quagmire of global climate politics, even if all are still at the early stages of research and development. Sunlight-reducing

show abstract

“…As stated by Newell and Lane, this is not surprising, as environmental issues are "shaped by the social relations, institutional configurations, and practices of power that we observe in other areas produced by the same global political economy that provides the ideological, institutional, and material context in which responses to the ecological crisis have to be forged. Recognition of this fact takes us to the heart of the contradictions and opportunities that we observe in global attempts to manage environmental crises" [98].…”

Section: Conclusion: More Of the Same Or New Paths?mentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID-19, the Climate, and Transformative Change: Comparing the Social Anatomies of Crises and Their Regulatory Responses

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite forces struggling to reduce global warming growing stronger, there has been mixed success in generating substantive policy implementation, while the global spread of the coronavirus has prompted strong and far-reaching governmental responses around the world. This paper addresses the complex and partly contradictory responses to these two crises, investigating their social anatomies. Using temporality, spatiality, and epistemic authority as the main conceptual vehicles, the two crises are systematically compared. Despite sharing a number of similarities, the most striking difference between the two crises is the urgency of action to counter the rapid spread of the pandemic as compared to the slow and meager action to mitigate longstanding, well-documented, and accelerating climate change. Although the tide now seems to have turned towards a quick and massive effort to restore the status quo—including attempts to restart the existing economic growth models, which imply an obvious risk for substantially increasing CO₂ emissions—the article finally points at some signs of an opening window of opportunity for green growth and degrowth initiatives. However, these signs have to be realistically interpreted in relation to the broader context of power relations in terms of governance configurations and regulatory strategies worldwide at different levels of society.

show abstract

IPE and the environment in the age of the Anthropocene

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Disaster Making in the Capitalocene

Disaster Making in the Capitalocene

Geoengineering: A New Arena of International Politics

COVID-19, the Climate, and Transformative Change: Comparing the Social Anatomies of Crises and Their Regulatory Responses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About