No abstract

Scientific knowledge has been a growing subject for organized political movements primarily since World War II. Science developed as a distinctive form of social activity in the seventeenth century, and refers to the collectivities of knowledge, tools, practices, and people who create verifiable, reliable knowledge about the natural world. Scientific knowledge may be in the form of words or formulas, or it may be represented in material things, such as a weapon or a drug. The growth of movements that challenge aspects of science parallel the immense government investments in science research post‐World War II, particularly in the areas of weapons development, agriculture, health and medicine, and industrial processes. As governments have used measurable standards to characterize more aspects of their citizens' lives—race, population, crime rates—social movements have come to challenge what Jürgen Habermas in his influential work Theory and Practice (1973) called interference in the “life world” of citizens. Today, many active social movements in the US, including Creationism, the pro‐life movement, health social movements, and environmental movements and their critics, use science to frame their claims. Ironically, although scientific claims are ubiquitous in political debates, they are often highly contested and therefore have less power than they once did.

No abstract

This year marks the twentieth anniversary of Global Environmental Politics (GEP). To commemorate this occasion, we reached out to the previous editors of GEP to ask them to identify the most interesting and impactful articles that have shaped the journal's history. This edition reflects the evolution of the journal, identifying areas in which GEP scholars have helped influence the field of global environmental politics and governance.The journal was founded in 2000 by Peter Dauvergne, who had the foresight to bring together the growing scholarship in the area of global environmental politics. We asked Peter to reflect on this early vision: "I was aiming to create an interdisciplinary publishing space for the growing number of researchers who were studying the global environmental consequences of political institutions and power struggles, from international treaties to grassroots movements. I was also wanting to develop an outlet for articles exploring the implications of escalating ecological damage for world politics. Finally, I was hoping the journal would help advance global sustainability by deepening the understanding of the politics of environmental change."The journal has evolved over the years. During its first few years, the journal published short commentaries (Current Debates), research articles, and book reviews. The short commentaries have morphed into the Forum Section, which aims to generate thought and debate around timely issues in global environmental politics. Under our editorship, we have introduced Research Notes to expand the conversation in the GEP community and provide discussions of new data sources and research techniques as the ways we study global environmental politics evolves. Yet, even with these small changes, the journal has continued to publish articles that reflect the community's commitment to inclusive scholarship. The journal remains a focal point for scholars from multiple disciplines and perspectives that are pushing our knowledge of global environmental politics forward.