Sustainability Through Unsustainability? Unintended Consequences and Emancipatory Catastrophism

Lombardo, Carmelo; Sabetta, Lorenzo

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-33173-3_9

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Crises are challenging routinized, institutionalized forms of ordering social relations, interrogating cultural practices, putting into question the modernist assumption that the risks of techno-mediated transformation are insurable, controllable, manageable, calculable, foreseeable, and understandable (Beck, 1992; Latour, 2017). But we also know that crises can be understood as central functional agents for reflecting upon given socio-cultural practices and societal orderings, which in turn may lead to significant transformations (Lombardo & Sabetta, 2020). As events, crises affect ambiguous, unintended relations by which the production of goods may turn into bads, wealth for all into wealth for a few and austerity for many, as well as distribution and production of bads into goods (Beck, 2015).…”

Section: Crisesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interstices of Dis/abling Experiences in Times of Crises

Schillmeier

2023

Space and Culture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is the very lived experiences of crises that draw attention to the situated relations of dis/embodied, spatial, and cultural practices that constitute dis/abling experiences that this Special Issue wishes to address and critically engage with. How are crises lived and experienced by disabled people and how can we learn from the experiences of disabled people in dealing with spatio-culturally situated differences and related specific constraints and requirements in situations of crises? How may these experiences allude to the diversity of embodied life? Understood as precarious interstices, crises experiences not only tell us much about how we live and think by troubling of how we think and live, but they also make us think, hesitate, imagine, and tinker of how we do and may wish to live differently. By unfolding these interstitial experiences, this Special Issue wishes to contribute to the emergence of “publics” (Dewey) which draw attention to the diversity of dis/abling experiences and related modes of existence.

show abstract

Section: Crisesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interstices of Dis/abling Experiences in Times of Crises

Schillmeier

2023

Space and Culture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Reconsidering the Risk Society: Its Parameters and Repercussions Evaluated by a Statistical Model with Aspects of Different Social Sciences

Dursun

2020

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessing the plausibility of climate futures

Engels

Marotzke

2023

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We suggest a new Social Plausibility Assessment Framework to assess which climate futures are plausible (Aykut, Wiener et al., 2021). The approach is rooted in theories about social change, social inertia and path dependency, disruptive change, and transformation. This theoretical basis allows us to identify a set of key drivers that can be assumed to have a high impact on a given future scenario. A climate future is socially plausible if the empirical evidence about the key drivers point in the direction toward the chosen scenario, or at least strongly indicates that enabling conditions are building up that support this direction. To test the framework, we chose the scenario of deep decarbonization by 2050 which is our understanding of the necessary social change that would be needed for limiting the global temperature rise to 1.5 °C, with reasonable likelihood of only a limited overshoot. We selected ten key social drivers that influence whether we achieve deep decarbonization by 2050: UN climate governance, transnational initiatives, climate-related regulation, climate protests and social movements, climate litigation, corporate responses, fossil fuel divestment, consumption patterns, journalism, and knowledge production. We defined enabling and constraining conditions for each of these drivers to be able to assess whether these drivers are moving towards or away from deep decarbonization, and how fast. We used extensive literature reviews, existing data bases, and our own research to establish the empirical evidence for the assessment. Unless the enabling conditions of social drivers change dramatically over the next few years, reaching worldwide deep decarbonization by 2050 is not plausible. We discuss implications of this assessment.

show abstract

Sustainability Through Unsustainability? Unintended Consequences and Emancipatory Catastrophism

Cited by 3 publications

References 21 publications

Interstices of Dis/abling Experiences in Times of Crises

Interstices of Dis/abling Experiences in Times of Crises

Reconsidering the Risk Society: Its Parameters and Repercussions Evaluated by a Statistical Model with Aspects of Different Social Sciences

Assessing the plausibility of climate futures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About