Part I
Week 1 - introduction and issue of scale
Ch.1 Moseley - Introduction
Human environment geography = the investigation of nature-society relationships
Types of human management and use of renewable resources:
Exploitation = short-term extracting of ecosystem services, not examining the long-term values.
Usually a resource is being over-harvested in the short term
- Think of fisheries, forests
Preservation = non consumptive use of the environment
- Wilderness area/parks where you still can hike, camp or anything.
Conservation = maintaining the environment. Allowed to use the environment within its limits.
- deforesting within its sustainable limits; yield forest but also replanting it
The issue of scale
- Modifiable areal unit problem = the fact that scalar findings can be influenced by two
issues related to scale; the level (national, regional, etc.) at which data is aggregated
and the boundaries of spatial units (hoe is het afgebakend; wat wordt wel meegenomen
en wat niet zoals import/export)
- Politics of scale = the political implications of the choice of scale at which an
environmental issue is articulated and conceptualized
- Scale can be used as a framing device → is a powerful political
strategy. Due to the fact that focusing on a particular scale
presupposes certain kinds of solution while foreclosing others
Scale in different ways and in relation to the approaches:
- The scale at which an approach (exploitation, preservation, or conservation) is
implemented
, - The scale at which the approach is being analyzed
- The scale at which the approach is discussed and described
Scale frames = the scales at which an approach implemented/analyzed
Preservation approach is often used on a modest scale, as it is difficult to set aside large tracts
of land where humans can't use natural resources, especially when an area is highly populated.
- On the scale of the parks itself, preservation is a good option to sustain
nature. However, at broader scales of analysis, it can be noted that
surrounding areas are being over-exploited, due to the preserved parks →
preservation becomes exploitation/conservation on a broader scale
Conservation approach could be implemented at a much broader scale, as it allows for human
use of resources within biological limits. This relates to sustainable development, and such an
approach is not in line with the current capitalism economy.
- Conservation is often implemented on a local scale, for example, at forests. These
forests are being divided into plots which are being harvested every X years. When
looking at the scale of the plots itself, you could conclude that the forest is being
exploited, but when looking at the forest scale, you could conclude that the forest is
being conserved.
→ thus, scale does matter and the choice of scale is with political and
ideological implications
Geographic issues of land management and scale:
Preservation at local scale could violate conservation at a broader scale if it leads to
overexploitation on other areas (outside the preserved areas)
The human use of ‘normal areas’ (not-preserved, conserved, or exploited) subsidizes the
resources etc. that normally would come from preserved areas → people allow to
set aside areas for preservation.
- This ‘subsidy’ (vervanging) comes from other countries, or from the country where the
preserved area is.
Creation of preservation parks → relocation of peoples to other areas.
- In the initial areas where they come from, they have less to little impact on the preserve,
and their impact increases when being placed somewhere else
- Increased costs in terms of compromised livelihoods
,Ecotourists pay fees for preserved parks in often developing countries, which results in ‘benefits’
for preserving areas. However, these benefits are not being distributed over those that bear the
costs of the park (local people being displaced to somewhere else)
→ preservation is only preservation at the scale of preserve. When broadening the
scale frames, this is not really preservation because non-use/non-consumptive use
in one area is almost always subsidized by use in surrounding areas.
→ distinction between conservation, preservation and exploitation becomes blurred.
Janicke 2017 - The multilevel system of global climate
governance - the model and its current state
In global climate governance the concept of MLG has become indispensable, thus fruitful for
Multi-level climate governance (MLCG):
- Global governance also needs the intermediate levels of the global political system
(regional, national, local)
- The role of each level is specific; own responsibilities, challenges, opportunities. Also
has specific horizontal dynamics (learning, competition, cooperation)
- Vertical interaction offer additional potential; the up-scaling of best practices via higher
level policies and policy support for the lower levels
- Multi-level climate governance is also multi-stakeholder governance, so relevant interest
groups are also being addressed
The role and potential of different levels in MLCG
The global level of climate governance, which is influenced by several institutions (UNFCCC-
Regime, UNEP, IPCC)
- Challenges:
- The formal institutions are relatively weak (lack of budget etc)
- Decision-making is restricted
- Opportunities:
- Climate negotiations have a catalytic function
- Provides relevant information and knowledge at lower levels of the system
The level of world regions (EU, African Union)
- Challenges:
- Weak institutional capacity (except for the EU)
- Opportunities
- Global objectives can be translated into strategies that take regional conditions
into account
- Climate protection and adaptation are relevant topics on the agenda
EU is a very dynamic subsystem of the global system and has undertaken horizontal
peer-to-peer initiatives to strengthen international climate negotiations.
, The national level
- Challenges: -
- Opportunities:
- Climate policy leadership is strongest at this level and are thus key players in the
MLCG system
- Highest level of legitimacy and is the main focus on public opinion
- Greatest competencies and financial resources
- Monopoly on coercive power
- Competitor in international markets for clean energies
- National governments are at the core of domestic policy networks, and are
members of global networks
The provincial/state level
- Challenges: -
- Opportunities:
- Implementing national policies
- Direct global players, competing for foreign direct investment and selling
specialized products on the international market. (also climate-related industry)
- Competing with the nation-state in terms of climate policies
- Regional climatic opportunities can drive states/provinces to support certain
kinds of power
The city level
- Opportunities:
- Important because this is the level where most national regulations have to be
implemented
- Many jobs are created here, and most emissions are being caused by urban
activities
Rural local communities
- Opportunities:
- Countryside provides necessary sinks for CO2.
- Villages can export green elektricity
- Areas of experiments
The micro level of individuals
- Challenges:
- Individuals can’t be the main source of
solutions, as they did not ‘invent’ most
climate problems
- Intervention of individuals comes later in
the chain of causation of climate
problems
Week 1 - introduction and issue of scale
Ch.1 Moseley - Introduction
Human environment geography = the investigation of nature-society relationships
Types of human management and use of renewable resources:
Exploitation = short-term extracting of ecosystem services, not examining the long-term values.
Usually a resource is being over-harvested in the short term
- Think of fisheries, forests
Preservation = non consumptive use of the environment
- Wilderness area/parks where you still can hike, camp or anything.
Conservation = maintaining the environment. Allowed to use the environment within its limits.
- deforesting within its sustainable limits; yield forest but also replanting it
The issue of scale
- Modifiable areal unit problem = the fact that scalar findings can be influenced by two
issues related to scale; the level (national, regional, etc.) at which data is aggregated
and the boundaries of spatial units (hoe is het afgebakend; wat wordt wel meegenomen
en wat niet zoals import/export)
- Politics of scale = the political implications of the choice of scale at which an
environmental issue is articulated and conceptualized
- Scale can be used as a framing device → is a powerful political
strategy. Due to the fact that focusing on a particular scale
presupposes certain kinds of solution while foreclosing others
Scale in different ways and in relation to the approaches:
- The scale at which an approach (exploitation, preservation, or conservation) is
implemented
, - The scale at which the approach is being analyzed
- The scale at which the approach is discussed and described
Scale frames = the scales at which an approach implemented/analyzed
Preservation approach is often used on a modest scale, as it is difficult to set aside large tracts
of land where humans can't use natural resources, especially when an area is highly populated.
- On the scale of the parks itself, preservation is a good option to sustain
nature. However, at broader scales of analysis, it can be noted that
surrounding areas are being over-exploited, due to the preserved parks →
preservation becomes exploitation/conservation on a broader scale
Conservation approach could be implemented at a much broader scale, as it allows for human
use of resources within biological limits. This relates to sustainable development, and such an
approach is not in line with the current capitalism economy.
- Conservation is often implemented on a local scale, for example, at forests. These
forests are being divided into plots which are being harvested every X years. When
looking at the scale of the plots itself, you could conclude that the forest is being
exploited, but when looking at the forest scale, you could conclude that the forest is
being conserved.
→ thus, scale does matter and the choice of scale is with political and
ideological implications
Geographic issues of land management and scale:
Preservation at local scale could violate conservation at a broader scale if it leads to
overexploitation on other areas (outside the preserved areas)
The human use of ‘normal areas’ (not-preserved, conserved, or exploited) subsidizes the
resources etc. that normally would come from preserved areas → people allow to
set aside areas for preservation.
- This ‘subsidy’ (vervanging) comes from other countries, or from the country where the
preserved area is.
Creation of preservation parks → relocation of peoples to other areas.
- In the initial areas where they come from, they have less to little impact on the preserve,
and their impact increases when being placed somewhere else
- Increased costs in terms of compromised livelihoods
,Ecotourists pay fees for preserved parks in often developing countries, which results in ‘benefits’
for preserving areas. However, these benefits are not being distributed over those that bear the
costs of the park (local people being displaced to somewhere else)
→ preservation is only preservation at the scale of preserve. When broadening the
scale frames, this is not really preservation because non-use/non-consumptive use
in one area is almost always subsidized by use in surrounding areas.
→ distinction between conservation, preservation and exploitation becomes blurred.
Janicke 2017 - The multilevel system of global climate
governance - the model and its current state
In global climate governance the concept of MLG has become indispensable, thus fruitful for
Multi-level climate governance (MLCG):
- Global governance also needs the intermediate levels of the global political system
(regional, national, local)
- The role of each level is specific; own responsibilities, challenges, opportunities. Also
has specific horizontal dynamics (learning, competition, cooperation)
- Vertical interaction offer additional potential; the up-scaling of best practices via higher
level policies and policy support for the lower levels
- Multi-level climate governance is also multi-stakeholder governance, so relevant interest
groups are also being addressed
The role and potential of different levels in MLCG
The global level of climate governance, which is influenced by several institutions (UNFCCC-
Regime, UNEP, IPCC)
- Challenges:
- The formal institutions are relatively weak (lack of budget etc)
- Decision-making is restricted
- Opportunities:
- Climate negotiations have a catalytic function
- Provides relevant information and knowledge at lower levels of the system
The level of world regions (EU, African Union)
- Challenges:
- Weak institutional capacity (except for the EU)
- Opportunities
- Global objectives can be translated into strategies that take regional conditions
into account
- Climate protection and adaptation are relevant topics on the agenda
EU is a very dynamic subsystem of the global system and has undertaken horizontal
peer-to-peer initiatives to strengthen international climate negotiations.
, The national level
- Challenges: -
- Opportunities:
- Climate policy leadership is strongest at this level and are thus key players in the
MLCG system
- Highest level of legitimacy and is the main focus on public opinion
- Greatest competencies and financial resources
- Monopoly on coercive power
- Competitor in international markets for clean energies
- National governments are at the core of domestic policy networks, and are
members of global networks
The provincial/state level
- Challenges: -
- Opportunities:
- Implementing national policies
- Direct global players, competing for foreign direct investment and selling
specialized products on the international market. (also climate-related industry)
- Competing with the nation-state in terms of climate policies
- Regional climatic opportunities can drive states/provinces to support certain
kinds of power
The city level
- Opportunities:
- Important because this is the level where most national regulations have to be
implemented
- Many jobs are created here, and most emissions are being caused by urban
activities
Rural local communities
- Opportunities:
- Countryside provides necessary sinks for CO2.
- Villages can export green elektricity
- Areas of experiments
The micro level of individuals
- Challenges:
- Individuals can’t be the main source of
solutions, as they did not ‘invent’ most
climate problems
- Intervention of individuals comes later in
the chain of causation of climate
problems
