2013
DOI: 10.11114/ijsss.v1i1.75
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Regimes in Global Environmental Governance and the Internationalization of the State: The Case of Biodiversity Politics

Abstract: Scholarly debates on the relative (in-)effectiveness of global environmental governance increasingly focus on problems of cooperation across regime boundaries and on the missing knowledge base for such interlinkages. Global environmental change and related politics are increasingly seen as taking place in a complex field in which several ecological processes are interlinked -e.g. climate change, biodiversity, water, and land-use change -and these processes are deeply interconnected with societal processes, suc… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Political ecologists have noted the interrelation between enclosures/dispossessions constitutive of capitalist hegemony (e.g. Brand and Görg 2013;De Angelis 2001;Goldman 1993;Heynen and Robbins 2005;Johnston 2003;Karriem 2013), and struggles that emerge to defend and reproduce commons (Caggiano and De Rosa 2015;Compost and Navarro 2014;D'Alisa, Forno, and Maurano 2015; De Angelis 2012; Brownhill 2004, 2010;Varvarousis and Kallis 2017). These struggles can produce an "uncivil" society that challenges hegemonic ideas, and experiment with new ones (Armiero and D'Alisa 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Political ecologists have noted the interrelation between enclosures/dispossessions constitutive of capitalist hegemony (e.g. Brand and Görg 2013;De Angelis 2001;Goldman 1993;Heynen and Robbins 2005;Johnston 2003;Karriem 2013), and struggles that emerge to defend and reproduce commons (Caggiano and De Rosa 2015;Compost and Navarro 2014;D'Alisa, Forno, and Maurano 2015; De Angelis 2012; Brownhill 2004, 2010;Varvarousis and Kallis 2017). These struggles can produce an "uncivil" society that challenges hegemonic ideas, and experiment with new ones (Armiero and D'Alisa 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The biodiversity complex includes a multiplicity of institutions, actors and ideas, some compatible but others antagonistic (Koetz et al 2012). At least five inter-connected elemental issue-areas have been identified in the literature as the different facets of global biodiversity governance (Rosendal 2001;Le Prestre 2002;Swanson 2012;Brand and Görg 2013;Morin and Orsini 2014). Each regime that is part of the complex emerged over time, promoted by different actors and embodied in different institutions.…”
Section: The Biodiversity Regime Complexmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If contentious regulations and discourses prevail or are agreed upon on these terrains, they normally do not have the power to intervene in the competences of stronger international state apparatuses like the WTO 11 . This sectoralisation of politics into national and international policy fields is one mode of political domination, since it secures the incremental character of politics compatible with dominant or hegemonic social relations (Brand/Görg 2013).…”
Section: Financialisation and The Imperial Mode Of Livingmentioning
confidence: 99%