Personally, I don�t feel proud of things that I have little or no control over.
I guess I could be describes as Swedish, male, protestant, and heterosexual. I�m:
Swedish: Because I was born in Sweden and both my parents are Swedish citizens
Male: Because I was born with a particular set of chromosomes and a penis
Protestant: Because both my parents are protestants
Heterosexual: Because I discovered in my teens that I was born with some kind of bodily set-up that makes me like women
In short, these are things that I have had very little impact over (I acknowledge that you can choose your religion, but I�m fairly sure that most people who identify with a specific religion do so mainly as a result of having got that religion from their parents rather than a careful evaluation and choice of all available religions). Same with all the other people in the world: You don�t choose your parents (let�s not get into that one�), what country you were born in, your parents nationality, your parents religion, or your sexual preferences.
In definitely not ashamed to be Swedish, male, protestant, and heterosexual, but I�m not proud of it either. These are not the core things that I build my identity around.
Instead, I�m more proud of things that I have done and achieved in my personal and professional life and my identity is much more structured around those things and the core beliefs that I hold (and these beliefs are not primarily motivated in terms of nationality, gender, religion or sexual preferences).
That said, I do cheer when Sweden wins in football/soccer, especially if we beat those whale killing Norwegians!
Similarly, I think it is important to ask questions about what kind of factors countries build their own (green) identities around and how they may differ from country to country.
If the factors that countries build their self-identify from do differ across countries (which I guess is reasonable to assume), how do we identify these factors and their influence on national identity?
Moreover, can two countries self-identity as, for example, green based on totally different factors? If so, how do you assess and compare their self-identified "greeness"?
Or are we only interested in characterizing the identity of countries based on external factors that we apply equally to all countries and then create an index?
But I think that if we are looking for the motivation and identities of countries and how these relate to their actions (similar to what Adil talked about and I agree with him that they are important), then we may not be able to just use the same external measurement across countries but need to look at the different domestic factors that contribute to these motivations and identities.
In conclusion, we should all remember that it's not easy being green!
Cheers,
Henrik
At 04:41 PM 3/12/2005, you wrote:
I too agree that identity (or image) should not be confused with effectiveness (or impact). Building on what Stacy was saying, Pakistan or Saudi Arabia, for example, has a very strong sense of Muslim identity, but by any count is not very �Islamic� in any reading of what that means (neither mine nor that of the extremists). If you would allow me to be flippant, one could suggest that the notions of �democracy� and �freedom� is very central to US identity... Could could find people, I am sure, who would suggest that the US actually does only marginally well on either and has much to improve in both. That, however, doe snot mean that the average AMERICAN �believes� that democracy and freedom is central to his identity just as the average Pakistani feels that Islam is central to hers.
So, I do think identity should be kept separate from questions on efficacy of implementing the determinants of that identity. The interesting question, then, is why countries that have strong green identity do not always actualize the elements of that identity. Sometimes it might just be an issue of image (i.e., the state equivalent of green-washing). However, and importantly, it may also be a factor of the fact that countries (like people) have MULTIPLE IDENTITIES. So, yes, Costa Rica HAS a strong green identity but it probably has an even STRONGER identity as a developing (dare I say, Southern) country. And national identities do clash. So, just as my identity as a Pakistani-Muslim-Male (and I am proud of being all three) sometimes comes into clash with my identity as a generally liberal-secular-globalist (again, I am equally proud of being all three; and, no, being a Muslim-secular is NOT an oxymoron) is a reality I cope with and manage every day, being GREEN and being DEVELOPING is a reality that Costa Rica and Costa Ricans deal with every day... And, in my humble views, deal with amazing grace.
Lets take Germany which also has a strong green identity but has many policies that are detrimental to the environment because of its other identities (e.g., as a country that loves fast cars). Or some Scandinavians who reconcile their strong greenness with a whaling.
The point, of course, is that when looking at identity let us not forget that countries have multiple identities. That is not a contradiction, that is a reality. The real essence is how they negotiate with those multiple identities.
Where I will disagree with Stacy is on the utility of this debate. The reason it IS important to think about this is that identity CAN (and often does) inform policy and action. Once countries decide and verbalize an Islamic or a green identity [ actually, Islamic identity IS green ;-) ], they often do take steps to actualize that identity. Hence, policy opening emerge for real action. So, Beth, don�t discourage your student from this line of research ;-)
Adil
On 3/12/05 4:16 PM, "stacy vandeveer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
- Neil,
- Identity, as I understand much of the literature on it from multiple fields, is constucted and often ascriptive. If I identify as a muslim, I do not need to be constantly "acting like one" in order to have a muslim identity. Likewise, if I am a gay man, I need not be "acting gay" in order to sustain the identity. Others may say I am not "religious enough" or "gay enough," but I may still identify as such. If I do identify as such, it certainly might be very interesting to know how that identify effects some of my choices, actions and other aspects of my identity. This is a different set of questions than are invloved by a researcher or student measuring my identity against a set standard for "gayness."
- Back to Costa Rica and Beth's student: I fail to see the utility in attempting to 'assess' whether or not costa rica is 'green enough' to meet the standards of environmental professors and researchers like many of the folks on this list. I do think there are a host of other useful and interesting questions. There is a literature on "national identity" (related to the literature on political culture), as I recall from the distant time of my comparative politics comp exams. The approaches in that more general literature might be a nice place for Beth's student to begin.
- BETH: you might send the student to the "annual reviews" of anthropology, sociology, psych and polisci. I don't have specific citations in from of me, but I know these publications have published reviews of the literature and research on various aspects of identity in recent years.
- --Stacy
- At 09:53 AM 3/12/2005 -0700, Neil E Harrison wrote:
- Adil:
- Despite your "venting", you make a good point and a useful distinction. If Costa Rica looks green to the world and yet much less so from inside (on the ground and in the eyes of its ordinary citizens), there would seem to be a disconnect between image and identity. However, if identity is what drives actions, should it (identity) be measured (assessed) at the level of government, by the beliefs of the citizenry or by their actions, or at the ecological level in terms of deforestation rates, monoculture activity, and herbicide use? Is your identity what you say, what you believe, or how you act?
- Cheers,
- Neil -----Original Message----- From: Adil Najam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 4:25 PM To: Leonard Hirsch; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] Subject: Re: Green "identity" of states?
- Dear all
ADIL NAJAM Associate Professor of International Negotiation & Diplomacy The Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy Tufts University
- This is fascinating stuff. I do not have an answer to the original question (on literature) but it does strike me that at some point we might want to distinguish between image and identity .
- My sense is that image is what you project (or seek to project), identity is what drives your actions irrespective of whether you seek to project that identity or not.
- >From a non-environmental realm that covers some of my recent research, it seems to me (totally loud thinking here) that a country like the US has a very strong Christian (maybe, Judeo Christian) identity in how it operates and is organized, however it does not have (or seek to project a strong Christian identity). On the other hand, Turkey is actually a MUCH more secular place than America but has a strong Islamic image (at least in Europe and despite its efforts to proclaim otherwise) but not a strong Islamic identity... Interestingly, Malaysia has a rather strong Islamic identity, but NOT a strong Islamic image in the outside world. (One could actually conceive of a neat 2x2 matrix analysis of the two, since both of them can operate together, or independently).
- This might help us unlock the questions about Costa Rica discussed here. Any country where ecotourism is a major economic sector WILL ALWAYS seek a strong green image, whether its part of its identity or not. In Costa Rica s case, I think it IS actually also identity, but in the case of a number of Caribbean islands it may be image and not identity. Take Germany, then, seems to be (my view, non-empirical) that it has a very decent green identity, but a less strong green image (and mild desire to project that image). Many Scandinavian countries seem to have very strong green identities and not always strong green images.
- I know this is all horribly opinionated and very broad (would never let a student get away with this).... But maybe we can begin unlocking the puzzle with such a framework.... How would one measure identity and image.... Identity is probably function of the structures, policies, politics (maybe even Krasner s norms, principles, rules, decision-making structures) that a country puts in place. Image, is about how it talks about itself and how others talk about it....
- Anyhow... Enough venting, now back to grading!
- Adil
- -------------------------
- 160 Packard Avenue Medford, MA 02155, USA
- Phone: 617 627 2706 Fax: 617 627 3005 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Stacy D. VanDeveer
- 2003-06 Ronald H. O'Neal Professor
- Department of Political Science
- University of New Hampshire
- Durham, NH 03824
- T: 603-862-0167
- F: 603-862-0178
- E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------
ADIL NAJAM
Associate Professor of
International Negotiation & Diplomacy
The Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy
Tufts University
160 Packard Avenue
Medford, MA 02155, USA
Phone: 617 627 2706
Fax: 617 627 3005
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
