 |
 |
PLEASE SHARE THIS ANNOUNCEMENT WITH YOUR CONTACTS AND NETWORKS The environment in International Relations: for a historical sociology Montpellier, Monday, July 10, 2017, afternoon Thematic Session of the 14th Congress of the French Association of Political Science (AFSP) to be held in Montpellier, France, from Monday, July 10, to Wednesday, July 12 <http://www.afsp.msh-paris.fr> www.afsp.msh-paris.fr Call for proposals The historical sociology of the environment as a domain of International Relations still needs to be written, despite some promising recent publications (Ivanova 2012; Aykut and Dahan 2015). In fact, most research on international environmental regimes mainly focuses on their emergence and their effectiveness to solve environmental problems (Haas et al. 1993 ; Young et al. 2010 ; Breitmeier et al. 2011). What the current state of the art does not allow to appraise international environmental regimes in a critical manner. At best, they can identify some emerging properties of these regimes. How to explain the fatigue that can be observed (Conca and Dabelko 2010)? We suggest that a key element that seems to emerge is the strong path dependence (David 1985; Pierson 2000). More than four decades have shown a tendency to repeat and reproduce existing processes and practices at all levels. In order to give just a few examples, many conventions were established following the same model, such as the UNFCCC and the CBD, which were created based on the model of the 1985 Vienna Convention for the protection of the ozone layer. At the same time, one can observe a proliferation of boundary organizations bringing together science and politics following the model of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The best known example is the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). This forces us to question the influence of past actions and configurations, identified through archival research, analysis of long series of decisions or collection of oral history. At the same time, environmental regimes are not monoliths. An historical sociology of the environment in International Relations is expected to bring forward not only continuity, but also change in the organizational dynamics that may hide behind continuity (Deloye 2007; Nay 2011; Nay and Petiteville 2011). In order to consider also path dependence and change in this domain of International Relations, we propose to adopt a historical sociology approach (Déloye 2007; Mahoney 2000) to identify recurring and changing patterns of actors and of contextual elements that lead to the reproduction or non-reproduction of regimes, even if their objective can be quite different. This should at the same time nuance and enrich reflections on the effectiveness of these regimes. From this perspective, we propose three topics for panelists to freely choose from to elaborate their proposal. 1. How to conceive a historical sociology of the environment in International Relations? Historical sociology is an approach that has already shed light to many issue-areas. With this more theoretical topic, we propose to reflect on its value added for the study of the environment in International Relations compared to other approaches. 2. How to analyze path dependency and change in international environmental regimes? This topic is meant as an opportunity to carry on a more methodological reflection about the use of historical sociology to study the environment in International Relations. As a matter of fact, path dependency and change are still difficult to observe on the ground. 3. What does historical sociology tell us about path dependency and change in how the environment is dealt with in International Relations? This topic aims at launching a more empirical reflection on how historical sociology can help explain not only continuity and cycles within processes, but also changes, i.e. anomalies, exceptions to path dependency that can also be seen in environmental regimes. We encourage comparisons between regimes but also within regimes. Please send proposals in the form of abstracts (around 500 words plus a tentative title, as well as the name and institutional affiliation of each author) to both conveners: <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask] and <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask] Papers may be submitted and presented in French or English. The deadline for abstract submission is set by the AFSP to October 15, 2016. The conveners hope that some papers will lead to publication after this Thematic Section. They also hope that this panel will allow to reflect upon the possibility to develop new publications and research projects. Please find attached the scientific presentation in French of this thematic session. Conveners Jon Marco Church (Associate Professor, HABITER Research Lab, University of Reims, France) <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask] Kari de Pryck (Doctoral Candidate, CERI Research Lab / Medialab, Sciences Po Paris, France) <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask] MANY APOLOGIES FOR CROSS-POSTING