Climate change policy, conflict and transformative governance

Climate change is the behemoth of our age. It defies description, is too large to comprehend, and what we do understand about it is often terrifying. This is for many, a good reason to stop thinking about it or, like Scarlett O’Hara, decide to “think about it tomorrow”. Thinking about the role of conflict in climate change policy is an even more challenging exercise, but one that this paper tries to address. Briefly I propose that climate change governance could productively utilise conflict as a transformative agent for decision making, rather than try and avoid it, or ‘solve it’ by embedding conflict resolution mechanisms within those governance frameworks.There are many points at which governance and climate change intersect, there are multiple entry and exit points, and policies need embedding from local to international levels to work. At the heart of the problem however is conflict: between states and territories, between cultures, between the ideas of rights and responsibility and between the environment and economics. But as with Scarlett O’Hara, our society is fundamentally incapable of dealing with conflict. We seek answers based on win-win solutions, and ways of engaging with each other that are diplomatic, and politically correct.Conflict as such, is feared as the blunt stone that will bludgeon and ruin negotiations and damage already fragile egos, societies and potential environmental outcomes. When societies cannot or will not change, or when the changes required necessitate unacceptable cultural compromise, disjuncture between them can develop into forums of conflict. Conflicts arising are partly explained by the fact that worldviews, perceptions of the problem, and ideas about solutions differ.I argue for the transformative potential of conflict to facilitate adaptive governance and policy around climate change and climate change adaptation.Key Points:Climate change governance could productively utilise conflict as a transformative agent for decision making, rather than try and avoid it, or ‘solve it’ by embedding conflict resolution mechanisms within governance frameworks.Climate governance frameworks should enable the conflict to become the conflict resolution process itself. This means identifying likely conflicts up front and then using them as the basis on which decisions about the most appropriate policies and planning are made, ensuring that such decisions are cognisant of and provide forums for effective ways around conflict in implementation.This process might take longer to negotiate, but will mean less likelihood of climate related policies stalling in implementation due to intractable conflict.One way of operationalising this model is to employ a three-dimensional local adaptive conflict governance framework comprising: (i) adaptive management (which includes anticipatory adaptation/foresight), (ii) communications, and (iii) reflexive practice

Can we be both resilient and well, and what choices do people have? Incorporating agency into the resilience debate from a fisheries perspective.

In the midst of a global fisheries crisis, there has been great interest in the fostering of adaptation and resilience in fisheries, as a means to reduce vulnerability and improve the capacity of fishing society to adapt to change. However, enhanced resilience does not automatically result in improved well-being of people, and adaptation strategies are riddled with difficult choices, or trade-offs, that people must negotiate. This paper uses the context of fisheries to explore some apparent tensions between adapting to change on the one hand, and the pursuit of well-being on the other, and illustrates that trade-offs can operate at different levels of scale. It argues that policies that seek to support fisheries resilience need to be built on a better understanding of the wide range of consequences that adaptation has on fisher well-being, the agency people exert in negotiating their adaptation strategies, and how this feeds back into the resilience of fisheries as a social-ecological system. The paper draws from theories on agency and adaptive preferences to illustrate how agency might be better incorporated into the resilience debate

Rescuing religious non-realism from Cupitt

Don Cupitt's version of religious non-realism based as it is on linguistic constructivism, radical relativism and the view that culture forms human nature has been attacked with devastating effect by realists in the last few years. I argue that there is another strand in Cupitt's thinking, his biological naturalism, that supports a different version of religious non-realism and that he failed to see this possibility because of his global non-realism and commitment to the strong programme in the sociology of scientific knowledge. Cupitt's biological naturalism should have led smoothly into evolutionary psychology, which has an account of religious belief that supports a non-realist interpretation. Evolutionary psychology shows that religious beliefs are natural, normal and about matters of the deepest significance to humans. They gain their character from the operation of evolved structures of the mind and cannot be reduced to other sorts of belief. I argue that the form of religious non-realism that emerges from taking biological naturalism seriously has a future because it respects the nature of religious belief and seeks to build on its capacity as a unique source of meaning in people's lives. There is also enough common ground with religious realism for there to be genuine dialogue between the two

Human-Agent Decision-making: Combining Theory and Practice

Extensive work has been conducted both in game theory and logic to model strategic interaction. An important question is whether we can use these theories to design agents for interacting with people? On the one hand, they provide a formal design specification for agent strategies. On the other hand, people do not necessarily adhere to playing in accordance with these strategies, and their behavior is affected by a multitude of social and psychological factors. In this paper we will consider the question of whether strategies implied by theories of strategic behavior can be used by automated agents that interact proficiently with people. We will focus on automated agents that we built that need to interact with people in two negotiation settings: bargaining and deliberation. For bargaining we will study game-theory based equilibrium agents and for argumentation we will discuss logic-based argumentation theory. We will also consider security games and persuasion games and will discuss the benefits of using equilibrium based agents.Comment: In Proceedings TARK 2015, arXiv:1606.0729

The supernatural guilt trip does not take us far enough

Belief in souls is only one component of supernatural thinking in which individuals infer the presence of invisible mechanisms that explain events as paranormal rather than natural. We believe it is important to place greater emphasis on the prevalence of supernatural beliefs across other domains, if only to counter simplistic divisions between rationality and irrationality recently aligned with the contentious science/religion debate

The resurrection of group selection as a theory of human cooperation

Two books edited by members of the MacArthur Norms and Preferences Network (an interdisciplinary group, mainly anthropologists and economists) are reviewed here. These books in large part reflect a renewed interest in group selection that has occurred among these researchers: they promote the theory that human cooperative behavior evolved via selective processes which favored biological and/or cultural group-level adaptations as opposed to individual-level adaptations. In support of this theory, an impressive collection of cross-cultural data are presented which suggest that participants in experimental economic games often do not behave as self-interested income maximizers; this lack of self-interest is regarded as evidence of group selection. In this review, problems with these data and with the theory are discussed. On the data side, it is argued that even if a behavior seems individually-maladaptive in a game context, there is no reason to believe that it would have been that way in ancestral contexts, since the environments of experimental games do not at all resemble those in which ancestral humans would have interacted cooperatively. And on the theory side, it is argued that it is premature to invoke group selection in order to explain human cooperation, because more parsimonious individual-level theories have not yet been exhausted. In summary, these books represent ambitious interdisciplinary contributions on an important topic, and they include unique and useful data; however, they do not make a convincing case that the evolution of human cooperation required group selection

Pass it on: towards a political economy of propensity

The paper argues that the work of Gabriel Tarde on imitation provides a fertile means of understanding how capitalism is forging a new affective technology which conforms to a logic of propensity rather than to means-end reasoning. This it does by drawing together a biological understanding of semiconscious cognition with various practical geometric arts so as to re-stage the world as a series of susceptible situations which can be ridden rather than rigidly controlled. The paper examines the advent of technologies which attend to the variable geometry of so-called animal spirits in the realm of business and then, using Tarde's work as a springboard, considers some alternative means of understanding imitative rays which have less instrumental undertones. The paper is an illustration of the way in which biology and culture have increasingly become intertwined

Negotiating with a logical-linguistic protocol in a dialogical framework

This book is the result of years of reflection. Some time ago, while working in commodities, the author felt how difficult it was to decide the order in which to use arguments during a negotiation process. What would happen if we translated the arguments into cards and played them according to the rules of the Bridge game? The results were impressive. There was potential for improvement in the negotiation process. The investigation went deeper, exploring players, cards, deals and the information concealed in the players´ announcements, in the cards and in the deals. This new angle brought the research to NeuroLinguistic Patterns and cryptic languages, such as Russian Cards. In the following pages, the author shares her discovery of a new application for Logical Dialogues: Negotiations, tackled from basic linguistic structures placed under a dialogue form as a cognitive system which ‘understands’ natural language, with the aim to solve conflicts and even to serve peace