Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality,
and to see the links to virtual rooms.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
David Simon
(Royal Holloway, University of London)
Siddharth Mallavarapu (Shiv Nadar Institution of Eminence (India))
Send message to Convenors
- Chair:
-
David Simon
(Royal Holloway, University of London)
- Format:
- Roundtable
- Stream:
- Decolonisation
- Location:
- Palmer 1.05
- Sessions:
- Thursday 29 June, -
Time zone: Europe/London
Short Abstract:
This panel discussion session will explore some of the central dimensions of the Crisis in the Anthropocene that constitute global social challenges in the context of development studies. These include tackling poverty, inequality, deprivation, environmental degradation globally and locally.
Long Abstract:
This panel discussion session will explore some of the central dimensions of the Crisis in the Anthropocene that constitute global social challenges in the context of development studies. The conference theme highlights the profound human impact on our blue-green-brown planet, that is on the brink of breaching planetary boundaries and pushing us beyond the roughly 1.5 degrees Celsius tipping point. This threatens liveability and sustainability in many localities and regions and may well rapidly be 'off the scale' of imaginability and survivability. Inevitably, as mounting empirical evidence and increasingly clear projections by the IPCC and other authoritative bodies shows, these impacts are unevenly spread, both socially and spatially, both now and over the coming decades. The urgency of appropriate action is undeniable and we already know many dimensions of the required adaptations and transformations. Yet progress mostly remains too slow. These challenges are vital to the development studies community - heterogenous as it is - with our concerns for tackling poverty, inequality, deprivation, environmental degradation globally and locally. Hence this session asks what the crisis means for development theory, policy and practice and what development studies can and should be contributing to - and, indeed, whether it is capable of - addressing its relevant dimensions.
This session is sponsored by Global Social Challenges Journal.
Accepted contributions:
Session 1 Thursday 29 June, 2023, -Des Gasper (Erasmus University Rotterdam) O.A. Gómez (Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific Studies)
Contribution short abstract:
Within the Anthropocene era, threats and consequent crises will grow but must be used as windows of opportunity. Development thinking about threats and consequent crises has often been inadequate. Human security thinking can help in counteracting this. The paper outlines how.
Contribution long abstract:
Within the Anthropocene era, threats and consequent crises will grow but must be used as windows of opportunity. Development thinking about threats and consequent crises has often been inadequate. Human security thinking can help in counteracting this.
Part One explores how understanding and addressing crises through development processes and thinking can be obstructed, by: a) casual crisis talk; b) waiting for trickle-down; c) overriding preoccupation with root-causes; d) developmental hypermetropia; e) the politics and perceptions of crises; f) limits to attention, comprehension, and empathy; g) a too narrow view of admissible solutions.
Part Two discusses contributions from a human security perspective. Section 2.2 considers how the 2020 Human Development Report on the Anthropocene provides new thinking but has limitations: i) mechanistic understandings of social and policy processes; ii) one-sided emphasis on agency and freedoms; iii) lack of a notion of enough, related to iv) limited understanding of needs theory; leading to v) an unbalanced rendition of drivers of change. Section 2.3 suggests how human security ideas can help in responding. We understand human security thinking as including: 1) a normative concept and goal, 2) an analytical framework to serve that objective, 3) a corresponding policy philosophy linking peace, development and human rights, and 4) policy planning approaches to support operationalization. Each has various versions. Section 2.4 connects these ideas to thinking about transitions, as requiring changes in vision and values as well as in methodologies and analysis/planning tools. Human security ideas can contribute at each of these levels.
Ilaha Abasli (ISS) Farhad Mukhtarov (Erasmus University Rotterdam)
Contribution short abstract:
The paper conducts a critical review of selected academic literature. It investigates fundamental discourses on Circular Economy, how and to what extent such conceptualizations differ in context of Global North and Global South. It contributes to critical scholarship on CE’s socio-ecological impact.
Contribution long abstract:
Recent academic and policy discussions on the Circular Economy (CE) gained traction in sustainability and social sciences literature. They attempt to bring an alternative model to replace the current linear production-consumption model through more extended material use and staying within planetary boundaries.
Natural sciences and engineering scholars have mainly articulated the concept of CE. By contrast, social science has criticised techno-optimistic conceptualisations and the lack of empirical and contextual knowledge from Global South. Critical scholars called attention to CE privileging of neo-colonial and neo-liberal approaches to development. The focus on Global North demonstrates an emphasis on well-being, decoupling benefits, and high-technology solutions and predominantly focus on circulating high-value materials in Global North. By contrast, the focus on Global South by scholars and practitioners in Global North points to promoting ‘green growth’ through waste management jobs, focusing on certain types of material circulation practices, such as installing recycling plants for hazardous and low-value materials and neglecting the social implications for the informal sector in Global South.
Such divergence in conceptualisations and academic discourses on the Circular Economy concept and especially on its social and justice implications instrumentalises the Circular Economy as an International Development tool in the context of Global South. It frames it as a sustainability model with the benefits of addressing climate change and transforming lifestyles and social-economic-environmental relations in the Global North. However, these divergent conceptualizations potentially re-produce and replicate pre-existing inequalities in development and create silos on equity and justice considerations of CE concept.
Sonia Dias (WIEGO)
Contribution short abstract:
Amid transformatory pressures, this contribution assesses what place there is for informal waste pickers in today’s complex circular systems.
Contribution long abstract:
The UNEP Circularity Platform highlights that circularity transition needs to be inclusive to trigger the transition from a “winners vs. losers” to a “win-win” situation not only for the conservation of the environment but for the well-being of all. But what place is there for informal waste pickers in circular systems given the complexity of such systems?
If we look back in the past for answers, we can see that in the turn of the 19th to the 20th century when modern solid waste management was born, i.e. the moment where solid waste collection and disposal systems were created and started to be managed by municipalities, prompted by the growth of the urban reform movement that spawned from discoveries that linked filth with the spread of diseases we can see evidences for displacement of the waste workers of that time. As the well-off began to connect street waste with the spread of diseases, those who worked in the informal collection of waste became more and more stigmatized and, gradually, legislation was introduced to address the problem of poor sanitation conditions in ways that excluded them
As we fast forward to present days in which circular economy concepts are quickly spreading around the world, how will informal workers be affected by the blurring distinction between raw materials and wastes, by new legislation and procedures that comes with it? Is there a place for social inclusion within circular economy concept? What are the challenges in terms of ownership of materials and requirements for traceability that informal workers will face and most of all what frameworks will be in place for a just transition to circular economies? This presentation will examine these questions bringing in insights from action research in the Global South.
Carla-Leanne Washbourne (University College London)
Contribution short abstract:
This paper will focus on the urban context of global social challenges. It will draw upon a range of global examples to explore effective ways in which data, knowledge and wisdom about the urban space and urban life is created, shared and utilised.
Contribution long abstract:
This paper will consider the opportunities and challenges inherent in common examples of urban knowledge institutions (e.g. urban observatories, urban living labs) and the ways in which these institutions are working to engage a broad range of insights, experience and expertise in to decision making processes at the urban scale.
Kate Bennett (Institute for Sustainable Futures) Tracy Collier
Contribution short abstract:
The Crisis of the Anthropocene has significantly impacted the theory and practice of development, increasing disciplinary convergence and highlighting the need for profound paradigmatic shifts - which decolonise development finance and practice - if we are to overcome global social challenges.
Contribution long abstract:
The Crisis of the Anthropocene has significantly impacted the theory and practice of development sociology, geography and economics, increasing disciplinary convergence and highlighting the emergence of (and need for) profound paradigmatic shifts to overcome global social challenges.
This paper articulates the global trends impacting on contemporary development theory and practice and highlights the opportunities and challenges for development professionals to raise the voice and relevance of holistic local development priorities in the context of reductionist global responses to the Crisis of the Anthropocene.
Grounded in post-development theory, including self-determination of development pathways and the decolonisation of development, and touching on emerging paradigmatic shifts from sustainability to regeneration, anthropocentrism to ecocentrism, and domination to partnerism, the paper highlights how the 2015 development agendas (2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda on Financing for Development) have prompted significant changes to development models and approaches based on global rather than local priorities.
Decentralised and distributed finance and governance approaches and technologies are emerging to counter this trend and bring greater voice and agency to local stakeholders and their development priorities. The paper highlights where and how development studies can focus to support meaningful, integrated, and inclusive social, financial and technological innovation and approaches that ensure local action in support of (but not dictated by) global responses to the Crisis of the Anthropocene.
Amitabha Sarkar (Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies (IHEID))
Contribution short abstract:
The paper focuses at the interface of planet health and sustainability to intellectually process the relationships between health and development in the times of climate-induced changes in our diverse realities.
Contribution long abstract:
The paper is an attempt to theoretically advance the relationship between health and sustainable development. The discourse of development has been shaping the discipline as well as practice of public health since its inception. Thus public health has been largely conceptualised in development studies as population health in order to be a part of a comprehensive human development index. In the aftermath of COVID 19 pandemic and in the light of growing climate adversities, the significance of planetary health (consisting both human and ecosystem health) in the development studies is indicative. The notion of a productive body for human development is now altered with the vision of safeguarding the interests of human and ecosystem health for sustainable ecosystem services. It is thus imperative to analyse whether this change is meta-physical or meta-semiotic in the construction of knowledge systems wherein both planetary health and sustainable development are claimed to complement each other. How does this new construction shape the processes of techno-scientific as well as calculative exercises while determining methodological choices? Is it possible to foster a practical definition coming out of these two distinct yet interrelated 'ideas' to address the challenges on social, political, economic and ecological fronts? The paper tracks these provocative questions by problematising the real-world complexities accelerated by anthropogenic activities, and aspire to develop a framework for inquiries on health and sustainability in the development studies.