Beyond the environmental state? The political prospects of a sustainability transformation

Hausknost, Daniel; Hammond, Marit

doi:10.1080/09644016.2020.1686204

Cited by 62 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Theoretical groundwork is needed on democratic sustainability and transformation in view of who gets to decide, who brings in new ideas, and what transformation means for democracy (B€ oick 2020). Addressing these aspects seems essential to better understand why, for example, the democratic state seems to be hitting a "glass ceiling of transformation" (Hausknost and Hammond 2020), as well as to account for alternative practices and discourses of democracy (Hammond 2020).…”

Section: Democracymentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction to the special issue: reform or revolution? What is at stake in democratic sustainability transformations

Goetz

Gotchev

Richter

et al. 2020

Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the face of multiple crises of ecology, economy, and social equity, the question of how to democratically transform toward a more sustainable society is high on the political agenda as well as pertinent to academic research. The first part of this introductory article to the special issue provides a brief overview of contemporary interrelated debates on sustainability, democracy, and transformation. It discusses the main concepts, themes, and questions that are part of the highly diverse and constantly evolving body of literature on the topic, as well as differences regarding analytical frames and normative underpinnings. The overview shows that the literature remains largely silent about supporting theories of change, ontologies, methodologies, and principles-and/or the ways in which transformation, sustainability, and democracy are interrelated. The second part of this article introduces the contributions to this special issue. The special issue is guided by three overarching questions: what can we say about the possibilities and problems of democratically enacting changes toward greater social, ecological, economic, and political sustainability in societies? Which analytic frames are useful for evaluating change, including its democratic and sustainability quality? Where do evaluations and judgments derive their analytical and normative legitimacy from? ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Section: Democracymentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction to the special issue: reform or revolution? What is at stake in democratic sustainability transformations

Goetz

Gotchev

Richter

et al. 2020

Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first explanation for the paradoxical state of sustainability is that sustainable policies have not been bold enough. From this viewpoint, the popularity of the idea of sustainability is matched by persistent shortfall in practice, as if a glass ceiling hindered further transformation [2,3]. An alternative interpretation is that this shortfall is deliberate: sustainable policies are cosmetic and not intended to make substantial changes in the structure of liberal-capitalistic societies.…”

Section: Sustainability In the Anthropocenementioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability in the Anthropocene: Between Extinction and Populism

Maldonado¹

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pursuit of environmental sustainability has been affected by two significant developments in the last years. On the one hand, the Anthropocene hypothesis suggests that the human impact on the environment has increased to such a degree, that natural systems are now disrupted at a planetary level. The most dangerous manifestation of the Anthropocene is climate change, where there is need for greater urgency in the face of insufficient climate action. There are a number of scientists who currently warn of the possibility that failing to reduce the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere may render the Earth uninhabitable in the first place. A first goal of this paper is thus to ponder how the sustainability paradigm may be affected in the face of this threat and whether, in fact, sustainability may be displaced by “habitability”. On the other hand, some climate policies are eliciting the reaction of a populist movement—from Trumpism to the gilets jaunes in France—that opposes the rise of environmentally-related taxes and denies climate change or questions the severity of its effects. Both as a concept and as a policy goal, sustainability thus finds itself under double pressure: as it must focus on keeping the planet inhabitable, while the political opposition to measures directed towards decarbonization also increases. In what follows, the paper suggests that sustainability should be understood as a technocratic project to keep the planet safe for humanity rather than imposing a new way of life for all its inhabitants. This is not to imply that moral or ideological debate is to be curtailed, but rather to differentiate between achieving environmental sustainability and seeking the reshaping of socionatural relations.

show abstract

“…It has also been argued that such a rapid transition, for example, one that achieves net zero carbon in the 2030s, would incur costs in excess of economic growth-thereby violating an imperative that is deeply embedded in the institutions, values, and worldviews of almost all business and governance actors. The dominant transition strategy therefore calls for a more managed, incremental, "ecomodernist" approach that relies on "green growth" via innovation in technologies rather than on radical shifts in consumption and values [13][14][15][16][17][18]. Our proposed typology and mapping framework may be particularly beneficial to more radical actors in their struggle to identify, persuade, and build common causes with a small but diverse alliance of advocates for rapid transition to net zero.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge Integration in the Politics and Policy of Rapid Transitions to Net Zero Carbon: A Typology and Mapping Method for Climate Actors in the UK

Smith

Christie

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The types of political and policy knowledge required to guide rapid transition to low-carbon economies remain largely disconnected in the fields of political science, psychology, and sociology. The composition and key features of the main actors involved, and their relationships have also not been systematically described. This paper attempts to address these knowledge gaps by proposing a new, integrative typology of actors involved in climate change mitigation policy in the United Kingdom (UK) and a method for mapping these actors and selecting their typological descriptors onto a 2D space. The mapping method enables stakeholders to visualise and evaluate the strength of support for the UK government’s net-zero-by-2050 “green growth” strategy and the tensions, challenges, and strategic opportunities potentially facing more radical alternatives. The methodology could be replicated for climate actors in other countries and, in principle, for any geographical scale or level of governance.

show abstract

Beyond the environmental state? The political prospects of a sustainability transformation

Cited by 62 publications

References 44 publications

Introduction to the special issue: reform or revolution? What is at stake in democratic sustainability transformations

Introduction to the special issue: reform or revolution? What is at stake in democratic sustainability transformations

Sustainability in the Anthropocene: Between Extinction and Populism

Knowledge Integration in the Politics and Policy of Rapid Transitions to Net Zero Carbon: A Typology and Mapping Method for Climate Actors in the UK

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About