{"title":"引言:“从边缘研究”——全球南方对南极治理未来的看法","authors":"Patrick Flamm, Jane Verbitsky","doi":"10.1080/2154896X.2022.2066613","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the novel Coronavirus Covid19 a global pandemic. Within nine months, every part of the globe had been touched by the pandemic, including the most remote continent, Antarctica. More than two years into the pandemic, collective scientific efforts have resulted in the achievement of vaccines that provide greater chances of protection against a virus that has, so far, claimed more than six million lives. However, what has also been brutally highlighted during this period is the inequality, vulnerability, precarity and marginalisation of Global South states and their peoples. While the pandemic has affected the entire human population, vaccine nationalism and the superior economic resources of the Global North has enabled richer countries to secure exclusive, plentiful stocks of vaccines and reach high rates of vaccination, while poor countries struggle with vaccine inequity and disparities in distribution that have significantly increased the public health burden, and disproportionately impacted their ability to recover economically from the effects of Covid-19. The gap between rich and poor countries and themes of inequality and marginalisation of Global South states are now familiar tropes in many domains. From the 1970s they began to be heard in more and more arenas of global organisation and management as recently decolonised countries challenged imperial paradigms and systems of control and dominance. This extended in the 1980s to management of the southernmost continent and resulted in reports to the United Nations General Assembly for more than a decade on the ‘The Question of Antarctica’. For over 60 decades, the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) has been the prime governance forum for the management of Antarctic affairs. It is often seen as one of the most successful multilateral agreements: the Antarctic Treaty sidelined conflicts about territorial sovereignty claims, nurtured peaceful scientific cooperation within the world’s first nuclear-free zone, and its additional protocols and related agreements regulate Southern Ocean fisheries, protect Antarctic environments and prohibit mining. Despite a growing number of signatories to the Treaty, Western nation states continue to dominate Antarctic affairs through the only legitimate activity on the ice: science understood as a Western mode of knowing.","PeriodicalId":52117,"journal":{"name":"Polar Journal","volume":"12 1","pages":"1 - 4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Introduction: ‘Studying from the margins’ - Global South perspectives on the future of Antarctic governance\",\"authors\":\"Patrick Flamm, Jane Verbitsky\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/2154896X.2022.2066613\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the novel Coronavirus Covid19 a global pandemic. Within nine months, every part of the globe had been touched by the pandemic, including the most remote continent, Antarctica. More than two years into the pandemic, collective scientific efforts have resulted in the achievement of vaccines that provide greater chances of protection against a virus that has, so far, claimed more than six million lives. However, what has also been brutally highlighted during this period is the inequality, vulnerability, precarity and marginalisation of Global South states and their peoples. While the pandemic has affected the entire human population, vaccine nationalism and the superior economic resources of the Global North has enabled richer countries to secure exclusive, plentiful stocks of vaccines and reach high rates of vaccination, while poor countries struggle with vaccine inequity and disparities in distribution that have significantly increased the public health burden, and disproportionately impacted their ability to recover economically from the effects of Covid-19. The gap between rich and poor countries and themes of inequality and marginalisation of Global South states are now familiar tropes in many domains. From the 1970s they began to be heard in more and more arenas of global organisation and management as recently decolonised countries challenged imperial paradigms and systems of control and dominance. This extended in the 1980s to management of the southernmost continent and resulted in reports to the United Nations General Assembly for more than a decade on the ‘The Question of Antarctica’. For over 60 decades, the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) has been the prime governance forum for the management of Antarctic affairs. It is often seen as one of the most successful multilateral agreements: the Antarctic Treaty sidelined conflicts about territorial sovereignty claims, nurtured peaceful scientific cooperation within the world’s first nuclear-free zone, and its additional protocols and related agreements regulate Southern Ocean fisheries, protect Antarctic environments and prohibit mining. Despite a growing number of signatories to the Treaty, Western nation states continue to dominate Antarctic affairs through the only legitimate activity on the ice: science understood as a Western mode of knowing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52117,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Polar Journal\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Polar Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/2154896X.2022.2066613\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AREA STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polar Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2154896X.2022.2066613","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Introduction: ‘Studying from the margins’ - Global South perspectives on the future of Antarctic governance
In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the novel Coronavirus Covid19 a global pandemic. Within nine months, every part of the globe had been touched by the pandemic, including the most remote continent, Antarctica. More than two years into the pandemic, collective scientific efforts have resulted in the achievement of vaccines that provide greater chances of protection against a virus that has, so far, claimed more than six million lives. However, what has also been brutally highlighted during this period is the inequality, vulnerability, precarity and marginalisation of Global South states and their peoples. While the pandemic has affected the entire human population, vaccine nationalism and the superior economic resources of the Global North has enabled richer countries to secure exclusive, plentiful stocks of vaccines and reach high rates of vaccination, while poor countries struggle with vaccine inequity and disparities in distribution that have significantly increased the public health burden, and disproportionately impacted their ability to recover economically from the effects of Covid-19. The gap between rich and poor countries and themes of inequality and marginalisation of Global South states are now familiar tropes in many domains. From the 1970s they began to be heard in more and more arenas of global organisation and management as recently decolonised countries challenged imperial paradigms and systems of control and dominance. This extended in the 1980s to management of the southernmost continent and resulted in reports to the United Nations General Assembly for more than a decade on the ‘The Question of Antarctica’. For over 60 decades, the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) has been the prime governance forum for the management of Antarctic affairs. It is often seen as one of the most successful multilateral agreements: the Antarctic Treaty sidelined conflicts about territorial sovereignty claims, nurtured peaceful scientific cooperation within the world’s first nuclear-free zone, and its additional protocols and related agreements regulate Southern Ocean fisheries, protect Antarctic environments and prohibit mining. Despite a growing number of signatories to the Treaty, Western nation states continue to dominate Antarctic affairs through the only legitimate activity on the ice: science understood as a Western mode of knowing.
Polar JournalArts and Humanities-Arts and Humanities (all)
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
期刊介绍:
Antarctica and the Arctic are of crucial importance to global security. Their governance and the patterns of human interactions there are increasingly contentious; mining, tourism, bioprospecting, and fishing are but a few of the many issues of contention, while environmental concerns such as melting ice sheets have a global impact. The Polar Journal is a forum for the scholarly discussion of polar issues from a social science and humanities perspective and brings together the considerable number of specialists and policy makers working on these crucial regions across multiple disciplines. The journal welcomes papers on polar affairs from all fields of the social sciences and the humanities and is especially interested in publishing policy-relevant research. Each issue of the journal either features articles from different disciplines on polar affairs or is a topical theme from a range of scholarly approaches. Topics include: • Polar governance and policy • Polar history, heritage, and culture • Polar economics • Polar politics • Music, art, and literature of the polar regions • Polar tourism • Polar geography and geopolitics • Polar psychology • Polar archaeology Manuscript types accepted: • Regular articles • Research reports • Opinion pieces • Book Reviews • Conference Reports.