Location of Repository

Towards a global political-economic architecture of environmental space

By Ton Bührs

Abstract

The concept of environmental space (ES) has been put forward as a means of operationalising sustainability. Based on three tenets, the recognition of environmental limits, a strong equity principle, and a focus on resource consumption, the ES approach offers a cognitive framework for a comprehensive and integrated approach to environmental/resource policy and management. With growing concerns about mounting environmental pressures and looming ecological and resource scarcity, it offers also a more appealing normative basis for dealing with these issues than the ‘environmental security’ discourse increasingly appropriated by governments.\ud \ud In the 1990s, adoption of the environmental space approach was promoted foremost at the national level by a non-governmental organization and a handful of academics. Although some governments showed interest in the idea, it failed to make much headway. Reasons for that can be found in methodological issues, a weak political support basis, and the collective action trap. No governments adopted and implemented the ES approach as an overall framework for their sustainable development efforts, in part because accepting limits on resource consumption on a national level seems to make little sense as long as other countries are not willing to do the same (the collective action trap).\ud \ud A preliminary assessment brings up the existence of many significant obstacles to the adoption of the ES approach at the global level, whilst the agency basis is relatively weak and fragmented. Consequently, the chances of significantly changing the global political-institutional architecture to support an ES approach also seem dim. This leads to the conclusion that ‘What must be done, cannot be done’, at least at this stage. The best prospects for advancing the approach lie in the adoption of a global climate change regime based on the recognition of environmental limits and the acceptance of a strong equity principle, in line with the ES approach. This could set a precedent for the development of similar global regimes to address other areas of growing ecological and resource scarcity. In the mean time, a focus on limiting resource consumption associated with specific environmental issues offers the best basis for mobilising support for the adoption of ES principles

Topics: GE, JC
Publisher: University of Warwick. Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation
Year: 2007
OAI identifier: oai:wrap.warwick.ac.uk:1872

Suggested articles

Preview

Citations

  1. (2006). 1st ed.), Plan B 2.0 : Rescuing a Planet under Stress and a Civilization in Trouble. doi
  2. (1994). 2nd ed.), States and Markets. London ;
  3. (2005). A World Environment Organization: Solution or Threat for Effective International Environmental Governance? doi
  4. (2005). A World Environment Organization",
  5. (2006). Allocating Ecological Footprints to Final Consumption Categories with Input-Output Analysis", doi
  6. (2003). An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security. doi
  7. (1996). An Evaluation of Environmental Space as the Basis for Sustainable Europe. " doi
  8. (2005). An Introduction to Reinstating the State",
  9. (2007). Armaments, Disarmament and International Security. Chapter Summaries, doi
  10. (2007). Cuba Flies Lone Flag for Sustainability",
  11. (2007). Earth Audit", doi
  12. (1996). Economic Growth, Carrying Capacity, and the Environment", Ecological Applications, doi
  13. (2005). Energy, Security and Cooperation over the Next Quarter Century",
  14. (2007). Environment and Globalization: Five Propositions.
  15. (2007). Environment Programme (UNEP). doi
  16. (2007). Environment Programme. doi
  17. (1980). Environment, Ideology, and Policy. doi
  18. (2007). Environmental Space as a Basis for Enhancing the Legitimacy of Global Governance", Paper presented at the conference Pathways to Legitimacy? The Future of Global and Regional Governance,
  19. (1994). Environmental Untilisation Space and Reference Values for Performance Evaluation", Tijdschrift Voor Milieukunde,
  20. (1994). Environmental Utilisation Space: An Introduction", Tijdschrift Voor Milieukunde,
  21. (2002). Environmentalism : Ideology and Power.
  22. (1995). Friends of the Earth Europe
  23. (2005). From Resource Scarcity to Ecological Security: Exploring New Limits to Growth. doi
  24. (2005). From Welfare State to Ecostate",
  25. (2001). Gent: CDO-RUG, Centrum voor Duurzame Ontwikkeling,
  26. (2006). Global Environmental Institutions. doi
  27. (2005). Global Political Economy. doi
  28. (2005). Global Water Prospects",
  29. (2003). Green States and Social Movements: Environmentalism in the United States, doi
  30. (1998). Greening the North: A Post-Industrial Blueprint for Ecology and Equity. doi
  31. (2003). Growth Fetish. Crows Nest,
  32. (2002). Ideas, Politics, and Public Policy", doi
  33. (1996). International Political Economy and Global Environmental Change",
  34. (2005). International Political Economy and Globalization", doi
  35. (1994). Is Capitalism Sustainable? Political Economy and the Politics of Ecology. doi
  36. (1994). Is Sustainable Capitalism Possible?"
  37. (2004). It's All for Sale: The Control of Global Resources. Durham [N.C.]: doi
  38. (1980). Move to Identify Climate Change Security Hotspots, The Guardian,
  39. (2000). New Trends in Global Political Economy",
  40. Newell (2005a), The Business of Global Environmental Governance. doi
  41. Newell (2005b), "A Neo-Gramscian Approach to Business in International Environmental Politics: An Interdisciplinary, Multilevel Framework",
  42. (1996). Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth. Gabriola Island, B.C.:
  43. (1997). Paradoxes of the Competition State: The Dynamics of Political Globalisation", Government and Opposition, doi
  44. (2004). Past and Present: Our Next Forty Years.
  45. (2007). Planet Pentagon",
  46. (1988). Policy Paradox and Practical Reason.
  47. (1995). Rise and Demise of Commodity Agreements. Am Investigation into the Breakdown of International Commodity Agreements. doi
  48. (2005). Security Redefined",
  49. (2004). Sharing Environmental Space: The Role of Law, Economics and Politics", doi
  50. (1998). Sharing the World: Sustainable Living and doi
  51. (1998). Some Observations on States, World Orders, and the Politics of Sustainability", Organisation and Environment, doi
  52. State of the World 2005. Redefining Global Security.
  53. (2003). Sustaining Abundance: Environmental Performance in Western Democracies. Cambridge: doi
  54. (2005). Sustaining Abundance: Environmental Performance in Western Democracies", Environmental Politics, doi
  55. (2003). The Case against a New International Environmental Organisation",
  56. (1994). The Coming Anarchy", The Atlantic Monthly,
  57. (1997). The Concept of Environmental Space. Implications for Policies, Environmental Reporting and Assessments. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.
  58. (2003). The Disturbing Rise in Poverty and Inequality: Is It a Big Lie?"
  59. (1992). The End of History and the Last Man. doi
  60. (2002). The Enemy of Nature: The End of Capitalism or the End of the World? doi
  61. (2004). The Green State. Rethinking Democracy and Sovereignty. doi
  62. (2003). The Political Economy of Environmental Policy", doi
  63. (2002). The Political Economy of Globalization: The Old and the New",
  64. (1997). The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses. doi
  65. (1996). The Retreat of the State: The Diffusion of Power in the World Economy. New York: doi
  66. (1995). Towards Sustainable Europe : The Study.
  67. (2007). Us Military Consumption,33 http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/schrinrj.html,
  68. (2007). Us Military Energy Consumption- Facts and Figures,
  69. (1993). Wams (eds.)
  70. (2005). Water Wars: Privatization, Pollution and Profit",

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.