‘The Climate Has Always Been Changing’: Sarah Palin, Climate Change Denialism, and American Conservatism

Celebrity politician Sarah Palin diffused climate denialism, while advocating a version of social and political conservatism. This article scrutinises her rhetoric and argues that she crafted and performed a brand or ethos that resonated with common-sense conservatism, while at the same time reinforcing and popularising this doctrine. The article discerns the epistemological and ontological premises of Palin’s ideological position and probes how she used her image as an anti-intellectual, frontier individual to speak common sense and to advocate free-market ideology and climate denialism. The article, then, contributes to our understanding of how celebrity politicians craft and use ethos to promote anti-environmental agendas and ideological positions. It also highlights the embeddedness of climate denialism in the political conviction that Palin espoused

Inventing the Environmental State:Neoliberal Common Sense and the Limits to Transformation

The neoliberal nature of the environmental state prevents a transformation to long-term sustainability. Taking the case of Britain, I scrutinise the rhetorical invention of the environmental state by identifying and analysing the commonplaces that informed political arguments for environmental policymaking between 1997–2015. The analysis shows that the rhetoric of the British environmental state is grounded on neoliberal commonplaces, which entails an understanding of environmental problems and solutions that precludes actual transformation. Ultimately, neoliberalism functions as a glass ceiling to radical environmental transformation; a transformative rhetoric informed by commonplaces different to those of neoliberalism is paramount to the institution of a counter-hegemonic ecological paradigm.</p

An Ēthos against Scarcity: Sketching an Ethic of Care and Dike for Late Modernity

The “ethotic turn” in contemporary political thought is yet to theorize the sort of ēthos which is pertinent to the challenge of natural resources scarcity. This essay seeks to address this gap and has therefore two aims: first, tο offer an understanding of ēthos as mode of dwelling on the world; second, to sketch a particular appearance of this dwelling, one that invokes care for human affairs, but also the disposition to pursue justice, which is here affirmed as dike. An ethic that is informed by these two elements, care and dike, disposes us to address contemporary problems such as natural resources scarcity by urging us to think of the current state of affairs not in order to manage it, but to re-arrange it towards a more just direction. Heidegger's ontological scrutiny into “original ethics” proves pertinent to the task undertaken in the essay. We are human,“dwellers,” because we care to achieve a more just, that is less hubristic, rearrangement of the “scheme of things.

Truth-tellers: creating Britain's anti-austerity campaign

The UK austerity programme promoted since the financial crisis energised a dynamic assemblage of political forces, aspiring to create a space of oppositional political identification. Sophia Hatzisavvidou writes that, although this anti-austerity campaign failed to rally voters in the last two general elections, we shouldn't dismiss its impact on the country's political life

Beyond technofix:Thinking with Epimetheus in the Anthropocene

The Prometheus myth has long now provided inspiration for those who envision solutions to environmental issues. Prometheus is the figure par excellence of human forethought and progress in the anthropocene. In this article, we introduce the concept of ambient Prometheanism to describe the way of thinking that foregrounds foresight and anticipation and advances technological solutions developed by capital and energy-intensive projects. We question this stance, arguing that ambient Prometheanism, with its emphasis on technofix, leads to the economisation and depoliticisation of planetary environmental issues. Following Bernard Stiegler, we recover from the myth the figure of Epimetheus, Prometheus’ brother, as well as his associated faculty, epimetheia to theorise what we call an ‘Epimethean politics’. Thinking the anthropocene from the perspective of ambient Prometheanism and Epimetheanism means to consider the role of technology in climate politics, and in particular to make the case for the importance of afterthought in face of unintended consequences and accumulated errors. To substantiate our argument, we outline the challenge posed by emerging solutions focussed on technological intensification (geoengineering) and socio-economic acceleration (green growth and accelerationism). An Epimethean politics of the climate requires to use reflexivity as a capacity to anticipate, but also to mobilise epimetheia to account for accidents and past mistakes. Such a politics builds from an alternative conception of technology, one that radically differs from ambient Prometheanism. Finally we read as actualisations of Epimethean politics contemporary eco-political struggles and their imperatives for multispecies living and convivial livelihoods

Introduction to the special issue: Rhetorical approaches to contemporary political studies

This article introduces the special issue on Rhetorical Approaches to Contemporary Political Studies. It underscores the importance of innovations in political speech as a key to the continuing attraction of scholars to rhetorical methods. This is particularly relevant at a moment of crisis and disruption in established democracies when the parameters of acceptable discourse have been brought into question by forms of ‘post-truth’ politics. Although controversial, such efforts affirm the value of rhetorical analysis as a mode of political enquiry. The article then sketches the arguments of the contributions to the issue

Just transition in the post-pandemic city

This paper asks how the pandemic has affected climate governance, with a specific focus on just transition in cities. We respond to Westman and Castán Broto’s (Citation2021) challenge that three assumptions are frequently reproduced in the urban climate governance literature and ask: (1) Are social justice and environmental sustainability separated? (2) Does a sectoral perspective on cities constrain conceptions of climate justice? and (3) Is there action rather than just plans? We address these questions by studying three cities in the South West of England (Bristol, Bath, and Exeter) that have expressed aspirations for rapid and just transition to net zero. There are promising signs of climate action, although the pandemic slowed it down somewhat. Climate justice is not sufficiently embedded in plans or actions. Commitment to just transition is present but partial and often unspecified. Social justice and ecological sustainability are too often treated as separate goals, more likely to come into conflict with each other, than addressed jointly. Too much climate work in cities takes place in silos around energy and transport but separate from other sectors. There is a notable failure to engage with civil society for a just transition. We conclude that for cities to truly implement a just transition, better engagement with grassroots actors from across sectors and parts of society is necessary. The development of tools which support cities to analyse the complex interplay of distributional, recognitional, participatory and restorative aspects of justice could be an important part of delivering this change

What does a just transition mean for urban biodiversity?:Insights from three cities globally

Just transitions – responses to environmental change that minimise negative impacts on the most affected people and places, while ensuring nobody is left behind – are gaining scholarly and policy significance in areas beyond their original focus on carbon-intensive jobs and sectors. Yet attention to what a just transition means for biodiversity, as another aspect of the global environmental crisis, remains limited. Given the critical role that biodiversity plays in supporting livelihoods and wellbeing, this is a notable gap. This paper assesses what a just transition means for biodiversity, focusing on urban environments as the spaces in which many people encounter biodiversity globally. We undertake interview research across three case study cities representing different geopolitical and environmental contexts: Bristol (UK); Yubari (Japan); and Cape Town (South Africa) and ask two questions: what does biodiversity tell us about the concept of just transitions in the lived environment; and what are the consequences of considering just transitions in the context of biodiversity in the lived urban environment? Based on our findings, we set out six principles for a just transition in relation to urban biodiversity, as areas for further empirical enquiry: a shared sense of what a just transition and biodiversity mean in the local context; diverse social and ecological knowledge systems informing decision-making; integration and cohesion across policies; inclusive, meaningful and early engagement; supporting communities during and after implementation; and measures for assessing the effectiveness of outcomes from an ecological and a social perspective

What does a just transition mean for urban biodiversity?:Insights from three cities globally

Just transitions – responses to environmental change that minimise negative impacts on the most affected people and places, while ensuring nobody is left behind – are gaining scholarly and policy significance in areas beyond their original focus on carbon-intensive jobs and sectors. Yet attention to what a just transition means for biodiversity, as another aspect of the global environmental crisis, remains limited. Given the critical role that biodiversity plays in supporting livelihoods and wellbeing, this is a notable gap. This paper assesses what a just transition means for biodiversity, focusing on urban environments as the spaces in which many people encounter biodiversity globally. We undertake interview research across three case study cities representing different geopolitical and environmental contexts: Bristol (UK); Yubari (Japan); and Cape Town (South Africa) and ask two questions: what does biodiversity tell us about the concept of just transitions in the lived environment; and what are the consequences of considering just transitions in the context of biodiversity in the lived urban environment? Based on our findings, we set out six principles for a just transition in relation to urban biodiversity, as areas for further empirical enquiry: a shared sense of what a just transition and biodiversity mean in the local context; diverse social and ecological knowledge systems informing decision-making; integration and cohesion across policies; inclusive, meaningful and early engagement; supporting communities during and after implementation; and measures for assessing the effectiveness of outcomes from an ecological and a social perspective

Protecting Everyday Nature

‘Everyday nature’, understood as people’s ability to access nature nearby, should be protected in law and planning policy, facilitating three key benefits: (1) human health and wellbeing; (2) intrinsic and extrinsic ecological advantages; and (3) supporting the UK’s 30by30 nature conservation commitment. Yet there are three obstacles to the protection of everyday nature: (1) the prioritisation of ‘special’ and ‘priority’ nature conservation habitats; (2) the lack of protection for Local Wildlife Sites; as well as (3) counter-intuitively, the rise of biodiversity as a preferred governing concept. Addressing these obstacles, the paper develops the concept of everyday nature, making four proposals for change: (1) improved conceptual analysis; (2) confirming current policy on Local Wildlife Sites; (3) implementing the concept of everyday nature in legislation and planning policy; and (4) implementing the Government’s target that everyone lives within a 15-minute walk from a green or blue space