Research Project
The Lorax Project: Understanding Ecosystemic Politics
Events
“I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees for the trees have no tongues.”
― Dr. Seuss, The Lorax
The Lorax project is a comparative effort to expand scholarly understanding of hitherto largely overlooked sites of politics – those located between global and national politics and built up around mutually acknowledged ‘shared ecosystems.’ The core question here is: Do regional politics around border-crossing ecosystems share important resemblances and differ in significant ways from global politics?
To address this question, the Lorax project analyzes the networks of participation, hierarchies of actors and diplomatic norms of the governance fields that have grown up around efforts to ‘speak for’ border-crossing ecosystems in three locations – the Arctic, the Amazon Basin, and the Caspian Sea.
Project Manager
Participants
Articles
Call for papers for a panel at the European International Studies Association Pan-European Conference (EISAPEC 2022)
Transnational Ecosystems Cooperation is Taking off
Reduced influence in the Arctic?
Options for Arctic governance in difficult weather
Lorax in Motion: Mapping Amazon Ecosystem Networks
This is the second in our “Lorax in Motion” series, which reports on our reflections from the project as it unfolds.
Lorax in Motion: Building the Transnational Ecosystem Politics Database
Lorax in Motion is a series whereby we report and reflect upon the Lorax project’s ongoing research activities. Here, we zoom in upon Lorax’s Dr Cristiana Maglia, who recently received her PhD in Political Science Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), after a stay as a visiting scholar at The University of Oxford. Her primary research interests include institutions, right wing political parties, electoral markets and ideology.
International Organisations and the Caspian Sea Ecosystem
Launching Norway’s Plan for the UN’s “Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development”
NUPI’s Centre for Ocean Governance is ready to step up to challenge.
Prestigious ERC funding to Elana Wilson Rowe – ‘I’m thrilled!’
The European Research Council (ERC) yearly awards talented early career researchers project funding through Starting grants. 403 research projects were granted this year, and Elana Wilson Rowe's (NUPI) is one of them.
New publications
From possible conflict to wartime cooperation: Laying the foundations of regional cooperation in the Caspian Sea (2002–2018)
This research paper uses snapshots of media coverage in the Caspian states to explore the stateled region-building efforts around the Caspian Sea from 2002–2018. Counter to the dominant conflict thesis in the literature, the findings suggest that the five states have moved towards more comprehensive political and economic cooperation. Relations have gradually been anchored in an understanding of the Caspian Sea as a shared space with multiple interlinkages and dependencies, even describing it as a “sea of peace and friendship”. This depiction is maintained by the Caspian states, also after the Sea became an arena and lifeline for Russia’s war against Ukraine after February 2022. This paper provides background and analysis of the developing regional cooperation and explores in the conclusion how this cooperation has gained new salience in Russia’s response to the sanction regime.
Introduction: Is the time nigh for ecological security?
Climate change and the ongoing destruction of the earth's ecosystems have increasingly been depicted as a security issue with the noble but not unproblematic goal engendering an urgent response. These climate and environmental security discourses have been extensively critiqued on both empirical and normative grounds. But is there an ethically defensible and even emancipatory alternative to envisioning the relationship between the environment and security? Matt McDonald in his new book - Ecological Security: Climate Change and the Construction of Security - argues that there is and lays out comprehensive normative framework for doing so. To interrogate McDonald's case for what he calls “Ecological Security”, this forum brings together four leading researchers from Anthropology, Geography, International Relations, and Peace and Sustainability Studies. While all contributors are broadly positive regarding goals of the book, each identifies weaknesses in the approach that move from suggestions on how refine the framework on the one hand to questioning whether the framework risks proving counter-productive on the other.
The Amazon rainforest and the global–regional politics of ecosystem governance
This article examines the global–regional politics of ecosystem governance through the case of the Amazon rainforest. Despite the bourgeoning literature on global and regional environmental politics, the interplay of these dynamics in ecosystem governance has still received limited attention. I here propose that the politics of ecosystem governance are rooted in a dispute over the realization of alternative ecosystem services. When global actors become invested in promoting ecosystem preservation to secure the realization services with diffuse benefits, it can affect cooperation at the regional level. Ecosystem-adjacent states can perceive external interest as a threat, building regional cooperation as a tool to defend sovereignty, but also as an opportunity, using it to bargain the terms of their stewardship. I use this framework to trace the evolution of regional cooperation in the Amazon, demonstrating how it was developed in response to this ecosystem's growing global salience. Through defensive sovereignty and bargained stewardship, regional cooperation helped Amazon states to cap international commitment and limit external influence in the region but also allowed for building some form of coordinated ecosystem protection. The research sheds new light on both the potential and the limitations of global–regional engagements for the preservation of the Amazon and other analogous cross-border ecosystems.
Networked territoriality: A processual–relational view on the making (and makings) of regions in world politics
This article proposes a processual–relational perspective on region-making and its effects in world politics. It revisits the concepts of regionalism and regionalisation to unearth the relational mechanisms underlying these archetypical pathways of regional emergence. Regionalism refers to the bounding of regions – the definition of its inside and outside, and of which actors fall on either side. Regionalisation denotes the binding of regions, the amalgamations of relations around a shared territoriality. I argue that regions affect world politics in their making through the boundaries raised and relations produced in the process. I then mobilise network theory and analysis to propose a framework for studying the making and makings of regions. Regions’ binding and bounding are rooted in brokerage dynamics that sustain clusters of relations denser inside a regional boundary, rather than outside, and allow some actors to control interactions across that boundary. I illustrate this framework with a case study on the emergence of the Amazon as a region in world politics. I analyse interaction networks in UN-level environmental negotiations involving the ecosystem. The analysis shows how the making of the Amazon has been tied to preserving the position of Amazonian states as the main brokers, speaking for and acting on behalf of the region.
Space, nature and hierarchy: the ecosystemic politics of the Caspian Sea
The Anthropocene has given rise to growing efforts to govern the world’s ecosystems. There is a hitch, however, ecosystems do not respect sovereign borders; hundreds traverse more three states and thus require complex international cooperation. This article critically examines the political and social consequences of the growing but understudied trend towards transboundary ecosystem cooperation. Matchmaking the new hierarchy scholarship in International Relations (IR) and political geography, the article theorises how ecosystem discourse embodies a latent spatially exclusive logic that can bind together and bound from outside unusual bedfellows in otherwise politically awkward spaces. The authors contend that such ‘ecosystemic politics’ can generate spatialised ‘broad hierarchies’ that cut across both Westphalian renderings of space and the latent post-colonial and/or material inequalities that have hitherto been the focus of most of the new hierarchies scholarship. Rowe and Beaumont illustrate their argument by conducting a multilevel longitudinal analysis of how Caspian Sea environmental cooperation has produced a broad hierarchy demarking and sharpening the boundaries of the region, become symbolic of Caspian in-group competence and neighbourliness, and used as a rationale for future Caspian-shaped cooperation. They reason that if ecosystemic politics can generate new renderings of space amid an otherwise heavily contested space as the Caspian, further research is warranted to explore systemic hierarchical consequences elsewhere.
Ecosystemic politics: Analyzing the consequences of speaking for adjacent nature on the global stage
This article introduces a conceptual framework for analysing and comparing the broader or unintended effects of cooperation anchored in border-crossing ecosystems. The importance of addressing this lacuna in our scholarship on such sub-global cooperation is underscored by research in political geography that has demonstrated how the creation of scale is an important expression of power relations and how interaction with the materiality of different kinds of spaces necessitates distinct political technologies (and thus may have distinct effects). The article introduces three key analytical angles central to policy field studies in international sociology and demonstrates their utility through a case of the Arctic/Arctic Council. These analytical angles – networks (what are the relationships shaping the field?), hierarchies (who leads and how does leadership work?), and norms for political behavior – capture key consequences and dynamics of ecosystemic politics in a concise fashion that lends itself to cross-case comparison. The Arctic case focuses on the changing network positions and roles of non-Arctic actors over time, as an initial exploration of the broader ordering effects of such forms of cooperation. The findings suggest that most non-Arctic actors have experienced a decline in their centrality in Arctic cooperation, even as the Arctic has received intensified global interest and the number of participants in Arctic Council work has increased. Further comparative work along these lines would leave us better equipped to assess whether states speaking for their own immediate environs is better – and if so, in which ways – than seeking common solutions to global challenges.
Unexplored resources for EU Arctic policy: Energy, oceans and space
The EUs current Arctic policy from 2016 focuses on climate and environmental protection, sustainable development and international cooperation. The EU has followed up with contributions to research and international cooperation in these areas. However, the EU’s engagement in the Arctic is overlooked internally – with the Arctic perceived of as a marginal arena for policy action – and externally – with a lack of broader recognition for the EU’s Arctic efforts and contributions. We suggest that the EU has perhaps defined its Arctic policy approach - and understood Arctic governance - too narrowly. Arctic policy has been a niche concern in Brussels, and this has resulted in a focused and consistent approach, but involved too few EU actors in Arctic policymaking. Consequently, the EU has unwittingly limited its role in the Arctic and made it even more difficult to formulate a convincing narrative about what the EU has to do with and in the Arctic. In our view, there are three broader policy areas that have untapped potential for giving additional ballast to the EU as an Arctic actor: energy, ocean and space governance.
EU's Arktispolitik er for snæver
Energy politics, space policy and ocean governance need to be considered, if the EU is to succeed in creating a well-founded and effective political narrative about its own role in the Arctic.
Considering ecological security from the perspective of Arctic ecosystemic politics
This brief essay is part of a book forum on Matt McDonald's book (2021) presenting the idea of ecological security. In the essay, I reflect on progress and prospects for Arctic cooperation and governance in order to consider the promise and limitations of McDonald’s ecological security framework. The Arctic is an instructive example for such an exploration. The longstanding post-Cold War cooperation in the Arctic is strongly rooted in an appreciation of the interconnected nature of the Arctic ecosystem, even as the governance mechanisms remain far from what would qualify as an ecological security approach in McDonald’s sense. Nonetheless, I suggest that especially two aspects are instructive from the Arctic example. The first relates to how ecological security would potentially interface with an already quite full landscape of governance practices rooted in ecosystems, and associated power political genealogies and effects. The second point is a reflection on unfolding events, seeking to explore how continued inputs from other forms of security governance could impact on emerging or partial attempts to govern with an ecological security perspective. Here, the status of Arctic cooperative governance after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is an illustrative example to consider. Both points can be read as impediments limiting the applicability of the ecological security framework. However, as McDonald argued, impediments are not the same as absolute limits (2021, 192) and potential obstacles are explored here in the spirit of advancing possibilities for ecological security.
Ecosystems and Ordering: Exploring the Extent and Diversity of Ecosystem Governance
This article argues that, to grasp how global ordering will be impacted by planetary-level changes, we need to systematically attend to the question of the extent to which and how ecosystems are being governed. Our inquiry builds upon—but extends beyond—the environmental governance measures that have garnered the most scholarly attention so far. The dataset departs from the current literature on regional environmental governance by taking ecosystems themselves as the unit of analysis and then exploring whether and how they are governed, rather than taking a starting point in environmental institutions and treaties. The ecosystems researched—large-scale marine, freshwater, and terrestrial ecosystems—have been previously identified by a globe-spanning, natural science inquiry. Our findings highlight the uneven extent of ecosystem governance—both the general geographic extent and certain “types” of ecosystems seemingly lending themselves more easily to ecosystem-based cooperation. Furthermore, our data highlight that there is a wider range of governance practices anchored in ecosystems than the typical focus on environmental institutions reveals. Of particular significance is the tendency by political actors to establish multi-issue governance anchored in the ecosystems themselves and covering several different policy fields. We argue that, in light of scholarship on ecosystem-anchored cooperation and given the substantive set of cases of such cooperation identified in the dataset, these forms of ecosystem-anchored cooperation may have particularly significant ordering effects. They merit attention in the international relations scholarship that seeks to account for the diversity of global ordering practices.