پژوهش های روابط بین الملل

پژوهش های روابط بین الملل

محیط زیست گرایی در نظریه‌های متعارض روابط بین‌المل

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان
1 استادیار مطالعات منطقه ای گروه علوم سیاسی و روابط بین الملل دانشگاه رازی
2 دانشجوی دکتری مطالعات منطقه ای، دانشگاه تهران
چکیده
گسترش تهدیدات زیست محیطی در سالهای اخیر و تأثیرات مخرب و ویران کننده آنها بر سلامت، اقتصاد، امنیت و ژئوپلتیک جهانی و ناتوانی دولت های ملی در پاسخ به این چالش ها، نه تنها مسائل زیست محیطی را که برای سالها توسط نظریه های سنتی روابط بین الملل نادیده گرفته می شد به متن نظریه های روابط بین المل آورد بلکه ماهیت سیال و چندوجهی این مسائل باعث شده است تا نظریه های مختلف روابط بین الملل، جهت گیری متفاوتی نسبت به این مسائل و تأثیر آنها بر روابط بین الملل داشته باشند.. مقاله بر این فرضیه استوار است که تبدیل شدن مسائل زیست محیطی به موضوعی امنیتی و سیاست اعلی، نظریه های روابط بین الملل محیط زیست را به عنوان منبع سوال های فزاینده برای این رشته که نیازمند توجه نظری و عملی است به رسمیت بشناسد. یافته های پژوهش مؤید فرضیه طرح شده است و نشان می دهد که در حالی که در گذشته و تحت تأثیر رویکردهای نظری سنتی روابط بین الملل و توسعه مفهوم امنیت دولت محور، با مسائل محیط زیستی به عنوان یک کلیت انتزاعی در روابط بین الملل رفتار می شد؛ اماتغییرات بنیادین در سیاست جهانی، موجب به رسمیت شناختن محیط زیست و عواقب غیرقابل پیش بینی و شگفت انگیز آن به عنوان یکی از موضوعات اصلی روابط بین الملل شد. نتیجه این محیط زیست گرایی پدیدار شدن یک جریان سبز در نظریه های روابط بین الملل بود که مفاهیم و شیوه های سیاستگزاری محیط زیستی را تحت تأثیر قرار داده است
کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله English

Environmentalism in conflicting theories of international relations

نویسندگان English

Rahman Hariri 1
abbas sarvestani 2
Rasool Rezaei Faramani 2
1 Assistant Professor of Regional Studies, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Razi University
2 PhD student in Regional Studies, University of Tehran
چکیده English

The spread of environmental threats in recent years and their destructive effects on global health, economy, security and geopolitics have brought environmental issues into the context of theories of international relations.The fluid and multifaceted nature of environmental issues has led to different theories of international relations having different orientations towards these issues and their impact on international relationsThe present article examines the emergence of environmentalism and the different and conflicting perspectives of international relations theories on this issue.The paper hypothesizes that the emergence of environmental issues as a security and top policy issue did not lead to the recognition of the emergence of international environmental relations as a source of growing questions for the field.The research findings support the hypothesis and show that while in the past, under the influence of traditional theoretical approaches to international relations and the development of the concept of state-based security, environmental issues were treated as an abstract whole in international relations. ; But fundamental changes in world politics have led to the recognition of the environment and its unpredictable and surprising consequences as one of the main issues in international relations.The result of this environmentalism was the emergence of a green current in theories of international relations that has influenced the concepts and practices of environmental policy and has led to the conceptualization of global governance as a tool and framework for understanding emerging environmental issues. There was also a comprehensive mechanism for cooperation between national governments to address these threats

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Theories of International Relations
Environmentalism
Global Governance
International System Scanning
Alagappa, M. (1998). Rethinking security: a critical review and appraisal of the debate. Asian Security Practice: material and ideational influences, 27-64.
Bakrač, S. T., Vuruna, M. M., & Milanović, M. M. (2010). Environmental degradation: Impact on ecological security. Vojno delo, 62(3), 314-328.
Barroso, J. M. (2009). State of the Union: Delivering a Europe of Results in a Harsh Economic Climate. J. Common Mkt. Stud., 47, 7.
Batrićević, A., & Paunović, N. (2019). ECOFEMINISM AND ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY. Facta Universitatis, Series: Law and Politics, 125-136.
Benton, T. (2018). What Karl Marx has to say about today’s environmental problems. https://theconversation.com/what-karl-marx-has-to-say-about-todays-environmental-problems-97479.
Betsill, M., Hochstetler, K., & Stevis, D. (2014). Advances in international environmental politics: Springer.
Biro, A. (2011). Introduction: the paradoxes of contemporary environmental crises and the redemption of the hopes of the past. Critical ecologies: The Frankfurt school and contemporary environmental crises, 3-19.
Boardman, R. (1997). Environmental discourse and international relations theory: Towards a proto‐theory of ecosation. Global Society: Journal of Interdisciplinary International Relations, 11(1), 31-44.
Boggs, C. (1986). The green alternative and the struggle for a post-Marxist discourse. Theory and Society, 15(6), 869-899.
Breen, S. D. (2014). Green Views of Marx: Reinterpreting, Revising, Rejecting, Transcending. SAGE Open, 4(1), 2158244013520609.
Campbell, K. M. (2009). Climatic cataclysm: The foreign policy and national security implications of climate change: Brookings Institution Press.
Clapp, J. (2006). International political economy and the environment Palgrave Advances in International Environmental Politics (pp. 142-171): Springer.
Clapp, J., & Dauvergne, P. (2005). Paths to a Green World: The Political Economy of the Global Environment: MIT Press.
Conca, K. (1995). Greening the United Nations: Environmental organisations and the UN system. Third World Quarterly, 16(3), 441-458. doi: 10.1080/01436599550035997
Cuomo, C. (2002). On ecofeminist philosophy. Ethics and the Environment, 7(2), 1-11.
Daly, H. E. (1996). Beyond growth: the economics of sustainable development: Beacon Press.
Dickson, A. (1997). Development and International Relations (Cambridge: Polity).
Dyer, H. (2018). Introducing Green Theory in International Relations. International Relations Theory, 84-90.
Dyer, H. C. (2017). Green Theory.
Faotto, A. (2020). Environmentalism in IR Theory. https://www.internationalaffairshouse.org/environmentalism-in-ir-theory/ accesed july,17.
Ferreira, M. (2018). Introducing Critical Theory in International Relations: https://www.e-ir.info/2018/02/18/introducing-critical-theory-in-international-relation.
Foucault, M., Davidson, A. I., & Burchell, G. (2008). The birth of biopolitics: lectures at the Collège de France, 1978-1979: Springer.
Franz, W. E. (1997). The development of an international agenda for climate change: connecting science to policy.
Gare, A. (2006). Postmodernism and the environmental crisis: Routledge.
Gertz, G., & Kharas, H. (2019). Beyond neoliberalism.
Gilpin, R. G. (1984). The richness of the tradition of political realism. International Organization, 38(2), 287-304.
Graeger, N. (1996). Environmental security? Journal of Peace Research, 33(1), 109-116.
Grieco, J. M. (1988). Anarchy and the limits of cooperation: a realist critique of the newest liberal institutionalism. International Organization, 485-507.
Guha, R. (2014). Environmentalism: a global history: Penguin UK.
Haas, P. M., & Sundgren, J. (1993). Evolving international environmental law: changing practices of national sovereignty. Global Accord: Environmental Challenges and International Responses, 401-429.
Hajer, M. A. (1995). The politics of environmental discourse: ecological modernization and the policy process.
Henderson, G. E. (2011). Rawls & sustainable development. McGill Int'l J. Sust. Dev. L. & Pol'y, 7, 1.
Heywood, A. (2000). Key concepts in politics: Palgrave Macmillan Basingstoke.
Imperatives, S. (2020). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our common future. Accessed july, 16.
Inglehart, R. (2020). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies: Princeton university press.
Johnson, P., & Duberley, J. (2000). Understanding management research: An introduction to epistemology: Sage.
Kavalski, E. (2009). Timescapes of security: clocks, clouds, and the complexity of security governance. World Futures, 65(7), 527-551.
Kennan, G. F. (1970). To prevent a world wasteland: a proposal. Foreign affairs, 48(3), 401-413.
Lamborn, A. C., & Lepgold, J. (2003). World politics into the twenty-first century: Unique contexts, enduring patterns: Recording for the Blind & Dyslexic.
Lapid, Y. (1989). The third debate: On the prospects of international theory in a post-positivist era. International studies quarterly, 33(3), 235-254.
Lott, A. D. (1996). Neorealism and environmentalcooperation: towards a structural explanation of international environmental matters.
Maniruzzaman, T. (1982). The security of small states in the Third World: Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Research School of Pacific Studies ….
Mansbach, R. W., &Vasquez, J. A. (1981). In search of theory: A new paradigm for global politics: Columbia University Press.
Merchant, C. (2005). Radical ecology: The search for a livable world: Routledge.
Mishra, S. K. (2008). Korean peninsula in the post-cold war era: a study of security paradigm.
Mol, A. P. (2003). Globalization and environmental reform: The ecological modernization of the global economy: MIT Press.
Network, E. D. (2020). The history of earth day. Homepage of Earth Day Network], www. Earthday. Org/About/The-History-Of-Earth-Day/[accessed July 16, 2020].
O'Connor, M. (1997). John Stuart Mill's utilitarianism and the social ethics of sustainable development. Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 4(3), 478-506.
Rawls, J. (2009). A theory of justice: Harvard university press.
Schumacher, E. F. (1986). Small is beautiful: Rowohlt.
Sofer, K. (2015). The Realist Case for Climate Change Cooperation. Center for American Progress, November, 30.
Spilker, G., Koubi, V., & Bernauer, T. (2017). International political economy and the environment. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics.
Sterescu, A. (2018). The Prisoner’s Dilemma in Environmental Politics: One Model to Rule Them All?
Sutch, P., & Elias, J. (2007). International relations: the basics: Routledge.
Taqwadin, D. A. (2012). Global Environmental Cooperation on Neoliberal Institutionalism Perspective [Electronic resource]. Access mode: http://www. academia. edu/3846321/Global_ Environmental_Cooperation_on_Neoliberal_Institutionalism_Perspective.
Van Alstine, J., & Neumayer, E. (2010). The environmental Kuznets curve. Handbook on Trade and the Environment, 2(7), 49-59.
Vreja, L. O., Bălan, S., & Mavrodin, C. (2016). Sustainability and the Tragedy of the Commons. A New Perspective. Paper presented at the International Conference on Competitiveness of Agro-food and Environmental Economy Proceedings.
Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics/Kenneth N. Waltz: Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
Waltz, K. N. (2010). Theory of international politics: Waveland Press.
Wapner, P. (2002). The sovereignty of nature? Environmental protection in a postmodern age. International Studies Quarterly, 46(2), 167-187.
Williams, C. (2010). Ecology and socialism: solutions to capitalist ecological crisis: Haymarket Books.
Zakaria, F. (1997). The rise of illiberal democracy. Foreign Aff., 76, 22.