政治前景:从气候安全关系到人类世的和平

IF 3.1 2区 社会学 Q1 GEOGRAPHY
Stefano Guzzini
{"title":"政治前景:从气候安全关系到人类世的和平","authors":"Stefano Guzzini","doi":"10.1016/j.geoforum.2025.104380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Against the backdrop of reframing the climate change-security nexus as peace politics in the Anthropocene, the article proposes to foreground political processes in the analysis, methodologically, conceptually and normatively. Methodologically, it shows how existing approaches which start from either the one or the other end of the nexus tend to crowd out the central place of political processes. Starting with climate in the elaboration of the causal path, and despite multiple attempts to overcome all-to-easy determinisms, the analysis still tends to externalize nature in the explanation. Starting from violent conflict for the analysis of environmental security, it similarly sees war as something external to political processes, which a conceptual switch to think security from peace would avoid. These shortcomings lead to a proposed change in the research design. While the classical setup is a typical outside-in design, where the domestic institutions provide the intervening variables to explain diverse outcomes for similar climate facts, the more socio-political design is inside-out in that it starts from the perceptions and understandings of the local actors, as well as the socio-political processes, such as the social conventions and repertoires of conflict resolution mechanisms, that may lead to resilience, conflict or peace under certain climatic conditions, also affecting the latter. Finally, the article engages with the normative problem of political agency under potentially radical uncertainty. It discusses an ethics of prudence as a possible solution, showing its attraction and limits as a relatively empty signifier that relies on moderation and lessons of the past.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12497,"journal":{"name":"Geoforum","volume":"165 ","pages":"Article 104380"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Foregrounding politics: From the climate-security nexus to peace in the Anthropocene\",\"authors\":\"Stefano Guzzini\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.geoforum.2025.104380\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Against the backdrop of reframing the climate change-security nexus as peace politics in the Anthropocene, the article proposes to foreground political processes in the analysis, methodologically, conceptually and normatively. Methodologically, it shows how existing approaches which start from either the one or the other end of the nexus tend to crowd out the central place of political processes. Starting with climate in the elaboration of the causal path, and despite multiple attempts to overcome all-to-easy determinisms, the analysis still tends to externalize nature in the explanation. Starting from violent conflict for the analysis of environmental security, it similarly sees war as something external to political processes, which a conceptual switch to think security from peace would avoid. These shortcomings lead to a proposed change in the research design. While the classical setup is a typical outside-in design, where the domestic institutions provide the intervening variables to explain diverse outcomes for similar climate facts, the more socio-political design is inside-out in that it starts from the perceptions and understandings of the local actors, as well as the socio-political processes, such as the social conventions and repertoires of conflict resolution mechanisms, that may lead to resilience, conflict or peace under certain climatic conditions, also affecting the latter. Finally, the article engages with the normative problem of political agency under potentially radical uncertainty. It discusses an ethics of prudence as a possible solution, showing its attraction and limits as a relatively empty signifier that relies on moderation and lessons of the past.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12497,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Geoforum\",\"volume\":\"165 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104380\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Geoforum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016718525001800\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geoforum","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016718525001800","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在将气候变化-安全关系重新定义为人类世的和平政治的背景下,本文建议在分析、方法、概念和规范方面突出政治进程。在方法上,它显示了从关系的一端或另一端开始的现有方法如何倾向于排挤政治进程的中心位置。从阐述因果路径的气候开始,尽管多次尝试克服所有容易的决定论,但分析仍然倾向于在解释中将自然外化。从暴力冲突开始分析环境安全,它同样将战争视为政治进程之外的东西,从和平转向安全的概念转变可以避免战争。这些缺点导致了研究设计的改变。虽然经典的设置是一个典型的由外而内的设计,其中国内机构提供干预变量来解释类似气候事实的不同结果,但更多的社会政治设计是由内而外的,因为它始于对当地行动者的感知和理解,以及社会政治过程,如社会习俗和冲突解决机制的曲目,这可能导致弹性。冲突或和平在一定的气候条件下,也会影响后者。最后,本文探讨了潜在激进不确定性下的政治代理的规范性问题。它讨论了审慎的伦理作为一种可能的解决方案,显示其吸引力和局限性,作为一个相对空洞的能指,依赖于适度和过去的教训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Foregrounding politics: From the climate-security nexus to peace in the Anthropocene
Against the backdrop of reframing the climate change-security nexus as peace politics in the Anthropocene, the article proposes to foreground political processes in the analysis, methodologically, conceptually and normatively. Methodologically, it shows how existing approaches which start from either the one or the other end of the nexus tend to crowd out the central place of political processes. Starting with climate in the elaboration of the causal path, and despite multiple attempts to overcome all-to-easy determinisms, the analysis still tends to externalize nature in the explanation. Starting from violent conflict for the analysis of environmental security, it similarly sees war as something external to political processes, which a conceptual switch to think security from peace would avoid. These shortcomings lead to a proposed change in the research design. While the classical setup is a typical outside-in design, where the domestic institutions provide the intervening variables to explain diverse outcomes for similar climate facts, the more socio-political design is inside-out in that it starts from the perceptions and understandings of the local actors, as well as the socio-political processes, such as the social conventions and repertoires of conflict resolution mechanisms, that may lead to resilience, conflict or peace under certain climatic conditions, also affecting the latter. Finally, the article engages with the normative problem of political agency under potentially radical uncertainty. It discusses an ethics of prudence as a possible solution, showing its attraction and limits as a relatively empty signifier that relies on moderation and lessons of the past.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Geoforum
Geoforum GEOGRAPHY-
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
5.70%
发文量
201
期刊介绍: Geoforum is an international, inter-disciplinary journal, global in outlook, and integrative in approach. The broad focus of Geoforum is the organisation of economic, political, social and environmental systems through space and over time. Areas of study range from the analysis of the global political economy and environment, through national systems of regulation and governance, to urban and regional development, local economic and urban planning and resources management. The journal also includes a Critical Review section which features critical assessments of research in all the above areas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信