Whose security? Politics, risks and alternatives for climate security practices in agrarian-environmental perspectives

IF 4.4 1区社会学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY

Journal of Peasant Studies Pub Date : 2023-09-18 DOI:10.1080/03066150.2023.2246386

Corinne Lamain

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Climate security, albeit highly contested, is moving beyond the discursive realm into policies and practices that implicate the control of land, water and forests. Through a systematic literature review this paper offers a typology of climate security practices. It observes a shift towards human security framing, offering potential for agrarian struggles. However, risks remain: the depoliticisation of scarcity, control-seeking over natural resources, a push for neoliberal approaches, a dominant focus on violent conflict, and knowledge politics. Alternative approaches are suggested, foregrounding place-specific alliances that address the politics of conflict and embrace plurality of knowledges, contributing to (agrarian) climate justice.

查看原文本刊更多论文

谁的安全?农业环境视角下气候安全实践的政治、风险和替代方案

气候安全虽然备受争议，但正在超越话语领域，进入涉及控制土地、水和森林的政策和实践。通过系统的文献回顾，本文提供了气候安全实践的类型。它观察到向人类安全框架的转变，为农业斗争提供了可能。然而，风险依然存在:稀缺的非政治化、对自然资源的控制寻求、对新自由主义方法的推动、对暴力冲突的主要关注，以及知识政治。本文还提出了一些替代方法，其中包括针对特定地点的联盟，这些联盟解决了冲突的政治问题，并拥抱了知识的多元化，有助于(农业)气候正义。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Peasant Studies Multiple-

CiteScore

10.50

自引率

17.60%

发文量

期刊介绍： A leading journal in the field of rural politics and development, The Journal of Peasant Studies (JPS) provokes and promotes critical thinking about social structures, institutions, actors and processes of change in and in relation to the rural world. It fosters inquiry into how agrarian power relations between classes and other social groups are created, understood, contested and transformed. JPS pays special attention to questions of ‘agency’ of marginalized groups in agrarian societies, particularly their autonomy and capacity to interpret – and change – their conditions.