Anthropocene Geopolitics and Foreign Policy: Exploring the Link in the EU Case

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Alternatives Pub Date : 2020-05-01 DOI:10.1177/0304375420931706
Filippos Proedrou
{"title":"Anthropocene Geopolitics and Foreign Policy: Exploring the Link in the EU Case","authors":"Filippos Proedrou","doi":"10.1177/0304375420931706","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scholarly literature has recently developed the notions of Anthropocene geopolitics and planetary security. How these relate to and whether they inform states’ foreign policy, however, remains a largely underdeveloped issue. This article goes some way toward addressing this gap both theoretically and empirically. Theoretically, it unpacks how traditional and Anthropocene geopolitics diverge in their approach toward the security repercussions of climate change and teases out the emanating foreign policy implications. These revolve around different levels of climate ambition, divergent approaches to fossil energy geopolitics, and differing weighting of planetary security versus mainstream geopolitical threats. Against this theoretical background, this article empirically zooms in on the EU case to explore which geopolitical mindset guides EU’s pursuit of climate change concerns and their incorporation in the EU foreign policy design. The analysis finds that, despite its comprehensive foreign climate policy initiatives, the EU remains fixed to a traditional geopolitical mindset and a foreign policy that underappreciates planetary security threats. This article subsequently operationalizes a foreign policy design informed by the Anthropocene geopolitics approach and sketches what it would entail.","PeriodicalId":46677,"journal":{"name":"Alternatives","volume":"45 1","pages":"101 - 83"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0304375420931706","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alternatives","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0304375420931706","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Scholarly literature has recently developed the notions of Anthropocene geopolitics and planetary security. How these relate to and whether they inform states’ foreign policy, however, remains a largely underdeveloped issue. This article goes some way toward addressing this gap both theoretically and empirically. Theoretically, it unpacks how traditional and Anthropocene geopolitics diverge in their approach toward the security repercussions of climate change and teases out the emanating foreign policy implications. These revolve around different levels of climate ambition, divergent approaches to fossil energy geopolitics, and differing weighting of planetary security versus mainstream geopolitical threats. Against this theoretical background, this article empirically zooms in on the EU case to explore which geopolitical mindset guides EU’s pursuit of climate change concerns and their incorporation in the EU foreign policy design. The analysis finds that, despite its comprehensive foreign climate policy initiatives, the EU remains fixed to a traditional geopolitical mindset and a foreign policy that underappreciates planetary security threats. This article subsequently operationalizes a foreign policy design informed by the Anthropocene geopolitics approach and sketches what it would entail.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人类世地缘政治与外交政策——以欧盟为例
学术文献最近发展了人类世地缘政治和行星安全的概念。然而,这些与国家外交政策的关系以及它们是否为国家外交政策提供信息,在很大程度上仍然是一个未开发的问题。这篇文章在一定程度上从理论和经验上解决了这一差距。从理论上讲,它揭示了传统地缘政治和人类世地缘政治在应对气候变化的安全影响方面的分歧,并揭示了由此产生的外交政策影响。这些问题围绕着不同水平的气候雄心、化石能源地缘政治的不同方法,以及行星安全与主流地缘政治威胁的不同权重。在这一理论背景下,本文实证地放大了欧盟的案例,探讨是哪种地缘政治心态引导了欧盟对气候变化问题的关注,并将其纳入欧盟外交政策设计中。分析发现,尽管欧盟采取了全面的外交气候政策举措,但它仍然固守传统的地缘政治思维和低估全球安全威胁的外交政策。这篇文章随后运用了人类世地缘政治方法的外交政策设计,并概述了它所需要的内容。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Alternatives
Alternatives INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
15.40%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: A peer-reviewed journal, Alternatives explores the possibilities of new forms of political practice and identity under increasingly global conditions. Specifically, the editors focus on the changing relationships between local political practices and identities and emerging forms of global economy, culture, and polity. Published in association with the Center for the Study of Developing Societies (India).
期刊最新文献
What Do We Know About People’s Politics? Testing a New Framework for Understanding Different Conceptions of Politics Running in Place: “Czeching” out the W/E(a)stern Performative Presidential Geoprostitution Discoursive Region Building in Latvia: The Case for a Contemporary Identity Search Civil-military Relations in Mexico: From One-Party Dominance to Post-Transitional Insecurity Sovereignty, Discipline, Governmentality, and Pastorate: The Ménage à Quatre of Contemporary Authoritarian and Right-Wing Populist Power
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1