Global Governance; Human Rights and Environmental

Question 1

What are the fundamental ideas of Deep Green Economists?

Answer 1

Nature comes first- it is superior as we rely on the environment

Question 2

What are the fundamental ideas of Shallow Green Economists?

Answer 2

Anthropocentric- Humans come first, but we should take care of nature. (this promotes sustainable development- current generations need to safeguard for future generations)

Question 3

What are Deep Green Economists view on sustainable development?

Answer 3

They don’t like it; action now, as its too late for compromise. We need to take a more radical approach. Capitalism is exploitative of the environment.
Groups like Greenpeace promotes this

Question 4

What are Shallow Green Economists view on sustainable development?

Answer 4

They favour it, we can balance the needs of humans and the environment. We can take a more moderate approach.
See what the UN are doing; the use of sustainable energy+ eating less meat

Question 5

What do Deep Green Economists say are the solution to climate change?

Answer 5

Radical:
Human population control
Rewilding
Veganism/Vegetarianism (all comes from capitalism- get rid of it issues solved)

Question 6

What do Shallow Green Economists say are the solution to climate change?

Answer 6

Moderate:
Financial incentives/punishment
Lifestyle changes (recycling/ eating less meat)
Political action (conferences- COP)

Question 7

What is the UNFCCC?

Answer 7

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

It is a mechanism for developing global environmental policy. E.g., COP

Question 8

What is the UNFCCC trying to do?

Answer 8

• To make policies legally binding

- Reduce carbon emissions, by setting targets; ‘common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities’

Question 9

Name three strengths of the UNFCCC

Answer 9

1. Includes pretty much every state- developed and less developed
2. Regular forum for climate change discussion
3. Membership of this body ensures states abide by their commitments to co-operate over climate change

Question 10

Name three weaknesses of the UNFCCC

Answer 10

1. They cannot force a state to do anything
2. It did not account for emissions of developing states, and how it would increase as they develop more.
3. The UNFCCC is only a recommendation

Question 11

What is the IPCC?

Answer 11

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

A panel of scientists from all over the world that provide evidence for climate change.

Question 12

What is the IPCC trying to do?

Answer 12

To ensure impartial information and advice about climate change to decision makers and interested organisations and groups.

Question 13

Name three strengths of the IPCC

Answer 13

1. It is impartial and there is rigorous research.
2. It has established an international consensus that climate change exists.
3. It has made it impossible for states to ignore the issue

Question 14

Name three weaknesses of the IPCC

Answer 14

1. It advises but cannot enforce
2. Reports can be out of date because of the time it takes to collect the research.
3. They have been accused of scaremongering- 2014 report said that there was a risk of death.

Question 15

What is the tragedy of the commons?

Answer 15

Areas and resources that are shared or owned collectively. (environment)

Question 16

What is the problem with the tragedy of the commons?

Answer 16

-They over use resources, and this ends up limiting what is left, but if you don’t take, someone else will.

Question 17

How is the environment an example of the tragedy of the commons?

Answer 17

-No one owns the atmosphere, but everyone has access to it. Therefore, pollution any where will effect everyone else.

Question 18

What solutions are their to the tragedy of the commons?

Answer 18

• Command and control; regulations that are put on various things to help reduce pollution. This isn’t very effective because companied find ways around the regulations. (fishermen)
• Cultural norms; shame and praise for people doing the right/ wrong thing. This only works on national levels where people have a common interest though, like the Native Americans with the hunting of buffalos.
• Creating property rights; if we create a sense of ownership, then it puts pressure on people to do the right thing.
• If big states put lots of time and effort into climate change, then its going to benefit others. (The USA funds 70% of NATO for the protection of others; This is mainly for protections against Russia)

Question 19

What are some examples of the tragedy of the commons working in terms of the environment?

Answer 19

• 1959 Antarctic Treaty; this ensures that the Antarctic remains apart of the great wilderness.
• The Montreal Protocol of 1987; banned the production of CFCs, which were depleting the Ozone layer.
• The Outer Space Treaty 1967; weapons of mass destruction cannot be in space, as well as not being able to own anything naturally in space.

Question 20

What criticisms have been made of the tragedy of the commons?

Answer 20

• Critics argue that it has been exaggerated. Many people have managed to sustainably manage goods. (Native North Americans)
• Human fertility has halved since 1950; so population is decreasing

Question 21

How do states’ desire to protect sovereignty prevent co-operation?

Answer 21

• States want to control their affairs.

- Internal sovereignty- electorate doesn’t like what has to happen; such as more taxes.

Question 22

What does Intergovernmentalism mean?

Answer 22

Literally- Between governments; Decisions based on consensus and unanimity. Every state must agree, so, every state has a veto.

• This maintains state sovereignty, but leads to nothing getting done, because all states have different interests.
• No one gets what they want, because they have to compromise. To get what state want we would need a higher authority of government.

Question 23

What does Supranationalism mean?

Answer 23

Literally- Above the nation.

• Ends the anarchy of the Westphalian system. (EG THE EU)
• Decisions are binding on all states; an element of compulsion, that leads to a possible loss of sovereignty, but the most efficient way of making a decision.

Question 24

What does Ukraine have to do with Human Rights?

Answer 24

Global Governance is the co-operation of sovereign states, there has been no co-operation between Russia and Ukraine because Russia isn’t having any of it.
IGOs should have been able to stop the war in Ukraine, but they haven’t.
-its the UN Security councils job to stop war. They had a vote to stop the war, but their isn’t going to do anything because Russia is a member, and not everyone will vote against them for their own self interest; eg, China abstained because its in their interest to. If this vote had gone through, then it would have been binding and Russia would be forced to leave Ukraine.
Peace leads to stability and austerity.
Nothing the international community does at this moment in time will stop the War in Ukraine; the sanctions aren’t effective, but they are needed. Its the same with things going to the international courts.

Question 25

What makes a genocide?

Answer 25

1. Killing members of the group 2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of a group 3. Deliberately inflicting on a group conditions of calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or part 4. Imposing measures intending to prevent births within a group 5. Forcible transferring children of the group to another group. Both Russia and Ukraine signed this convention, so Russia had to create a reason to go to war because they knew that they don't have a valid one.

Question 26

What can be done to prevent genocide?

Answer 26

1. Rules 2. Courts and tribunals 3. Right to protect

Question 27

How do you stop genocide if states are sovereign?

Answer 27

They can sign agreements that help to keep peace within the international community. Although these are catered to post 1945. Its good to have something rather than nothing, and we wont know what to change these agreements to until after its happened. States don't have to listen, because there is no compulsion without force.

Question 28

What do courts and tribunals do?

Answer 28

``` They haven't stopped the war in Ukraine, but they have been good at stopping war up until this point, and holds states/ people to account. Eg. Tokyo Trials, held the Nazis to account, and that they couldn't rely on the defence that they were told to do something. The ICTY, punishes states after the offence The ICC (where Ukraine has taken Russia) deals with war crimes and crimes of aggression. (both parties have committed war crimes.) ```

Question 29

What is the just a war theory?

Answer 29

This is an attempt by philosophers and thinkers to determine whether a war is justifiable and permissible. There are 3 main focuses; -Jus ad Bellini; deals when when its right to go to war -Proportional Response; Are you going to make the situation worse? Is it a last resort? -Jus in bello; deals with the conduct of war.

Question 30

What does Jus ad Bellini mean?

Answer 30

A war in self defence is a just war- both legally and morally. Legally, we can give Ukraine weapons because they are fighting in self-defence. Achieving proportionality isn't always easy, you cant respond legally and proportionality. State intervention can make situations worse.

Question 31

What does Jus in bello mean?

Answer 31

There are rules around when you can go to war; - You cannot target civilians- this doesn't mean that people cant die, it just has to be as a result of other things. - You cannot use certain bombs; such as nuclear weapons. - You cannot dehumanise prisoners of war. - White flag to be respected - The Red Cross must be respected.

Question 32

Issues with the just a war theory

Answer 32

- Forceable humanitarian intervention assumes that there are universal moral absolutes that unite the world. - States that intervene can be seen as using humanitarian grounds as an excuse to increase their power and further their own interests. - Humanitarian intervention doesn't always make things better. - Forcible Humanitarian intervention goes against the Westphalian system.

Question 33

Examples of intervention and how it affected the state.

Answer 33

- Vietnam War; The USA learnt that they cant win everything, and ended up being stuck in the war. - Iraq War 1990-1991; We made the situation worse, and after we left a civil war started. - Bosnian Wars including Siege of Sarajevo 1992-1995; We didn't get involved because it was deemed as a civil war. - Rwanda 1994; We didn't invade and should have done because genocide was happening in the country. - Srebrenica Massacre 1995; we should have intervened earlier, but we didn't. We eventually dragged Serbia to the negotiation table. - Kosovo 1999; We went in although it was technically illegal. - Sierra Leone 2000; We were invited in to help. - Iraq 2003; A bad idea, wasn't fully legal and made the situation even worse. - Libya 2011; we didn't enter, but imposed sanctions. The people sorted the issue, if we had went in the outcome would have been the same as Iraq. - Syria 2013; We didn't go in, Russia did- The US didn't go in because they didn't want to be the only one from the west to go in. - Uyghur Genocide 2014; we didn't go in, but even if we did nothing would change.