Political Geography最新文献

The special issue Abject Lives brings together five articles that attend to questioning the processes that render nonhumans as “abject others” (Kristeva, 1982), devoid of value and amenable to elimination and killing. By doing so, it centres animals and other nonhumans that rarely become subject to positive valuations or human sympathy, such as slurry, wolves, geese and other species that are classified as ‘invasive’ or as a ‘health threat’. Drawing on empirical case studies from Australia and Germany, each of the articles demonstrates how processes of abjection intersect with practices of state-making, governing and power; practices that extend towards nonhumans and that often work towards their violent erasure. In the introduction to the special issue, we review how the articles build from and contribute to a growing interest in more-than-human approaches within the subdiscipline of political geography.

This paper brings the narratives of the environmental activist groups Extinction Rebellion, Just Stop Oil and Fridays for Future into conversation with Critical Anthropocene Theory and Indigenous environmentalism to interrogate pathways for and limits of environmental political action under planetary conditions marked by nonhuman shaping power. Critical Anthropocene Theory, the paper argues, can problematise the simplistic positivism and managerialism of the new ‘extinction activism’. However, the conversation with Indigenous environmental practices, which flexibly manage tensions within human-nonhuman relations and centre radical social impact, reveals the political limitations of both extinction activism and critical Anthropocene thinking. The paper distinguishes the logic of fast change within existing socio-political parameters, which drives extinction activism, from Critical Anthropocene Theory's focus on ontological change as a precondition for a non-exploitative environmental politics, which deprioritises activist practice. Different from both, the paper argues that Indigenous environmental activism is marked by a yet different pragmatic approach, where both modern and non-modern political means are mobilised towards radical change. Indigenous environmentalism is marked by the dynamic co-evolution of cosmology and politics and moves flexibly between modern/nonmodern boundaries, highlighting new pathways for political action in the relational Anthropocene.

I examine the relationship between interstate river conflicts and intrastate violence such as riots, demonstrations, and civil wars in multiple regions from 1900 to 2001. I argue that interstate disagreements over cross-border river basins create instabilities in water resources, which can increase the risks for intrastate conflict by creating unequal access to water resources across ethnic groups, displacing populations, and reducing water supplies for downstream states. I find that countries that experience more frequent and salient interstate conflicts over shared river basins face significantly higher risks for multiple forms of intrastate conflict, especially if the interstate conflicts involve water quantity rights in river basins. Consistent with the pathways described in the theory, water conflicts between countries increase intrastate conflict risks more for downstream than upstream states, for countries with ethnic dominance, and for countries experiencing large numbers of refugees and internally displaced people. These results help us understand cases like the Syrian civil war where water conflicts in the Tigris-Euphrates basin combined with drought and forced migration fueled grievances against the government.

A peace agreement represents a chance for the state to renew its social contract with the conflict-affected population. Conflict may reoccur if their expectations of a peace dividend are disappointed. However, in the existing literature there is a lack of focus on post-war public services and the challenges to re-establishing effective state governance, especially in areas with significant rebel presence. Much of the literature still assumes that conflict zones are ripe for better governance and the post-war impact of rebel governance remains largely unanalysed. Drawing on original survey data, interviews and focus groups, this mixed-methods article analyses the impact of the 2016 Colombian peace agreement on health services in areas with high conflict intensity and sustained rebel presence. In the most conflict-affected areas, it finds an increase in demand for health services but no improvement in the perceived quality of this care. In fact, in municipalities hosting FARC reintegration camps, which were specially targeted for improved healthcare, we find a decline in both demand and perceived quality. Three key obstacles are identified: 1) favourable views of wartime healthcare services provided by the FARC; 2) difficulties establishing state presence locally; 3) high expectations and mistrust of government provisions. This demonstrates the lasting impact of wartime rebel governance, and the challenges it poses to post-war state legitimacy, and adds to our knowledge of the underlying mechanisms of uneven state capacity. It thereby makes an important and original contribution to our understanding of peacebuilding obstacles and to the growing literature on rebel governance.