Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 21:01:14 +0000
Following Leonard's note, I should elaborate briefly on Costa Rica's green
identity. We need to distinguish between the "identity" portion of Beth's
query and the larger issue of accomplishments in the environmental
arena. I interpret the identity question to mean does a state (or,
alternatively, does a society) conceive of itself and/or present itself as
pro-environment. So refining the question requires clarifying achievements
vs identify; state vs social identity; and identify as notion of self or
one's identity in the eyes of others.
Costa Rica is an interesting test case for Beth's question, not because of
its achievements (which are considerable, and are documented in my book and
elsewhere) but because its leaders have gone to great lengths to present a
green image to the world. Nearly every Costa Rican president since the
early 1970s has paid considerable attention to environmental policy, both
rhetorically and in terms of policy decisions. Beginning in the mid-1980s
the country's policy elites started to project this image abroad, making it
a central piece of foreign policy, positioning the country at the leading
edge of a wide variety of international initiatives (debt-for-nature swaps,
joint implementation, payment for ecosystem services, etc) and advertising
Costa Rica as a major ecotourism destination.
The domestic dynamic is very different, with PLN party leaders choosing
sustainability as a suitable conceptual framework for the post-Cold War
era, bipartisan alliances ensuring continuity in environmental programs,
and widespread, autonomous social mobilization for the environment that
proceeded in lock-step with state initiatives. What is the connection
between social green identify and the national green identify touted by
leaders? So many questions, so little time.
Paul
Beth, Paul, et al,
Costa Rica certainly has a "green" self-identity: that is what it tells
the world it is. But Costa Rica also has a rapidly growing population,
fairly rapid industrialization, and one of the highest rates of
deforestation in the world, among other environmental problems. I spent
about a quarter of last year in Costa Rica and did not see (using
non-quantitative measures) that it was evidently sustainable, despite
its good scores on sustainability metrics (from CIESIN, for example).
Apart from public finance problems, gross under funding of
sustainability policies, much illegal logging, and an almost complete
absence of central government participation in many rural areas, it
imports most liquid fuels (but exports hydro-electricity - so you can
see that it has intervened in many watersheds) and many consumer goods.
It is beautiful but far from perfect.
Identity is of interest not for its existence but its effects and as
Paul comments, it is wise to dissect "identity" into smaller particles
(especially separating self- from other). As Beth comments her student
is interested in "the concept of states developing (and acting upon)
green identities." For several reasons Costa Rica has not acted well
upon its green self-identity. It has a very high national debt load and
a weak and corrupt central government (its last three or four presidents
from both sides of the political spectrum have been indicted). Its
government finances are heavily burdened by large inefficient
parastatals that, however, contribute much to a quite enviable equality
of development across the country. So, even in that paragon
"self-identity" has not translated into really effective government
action. However, if the country tells itself enough times that it is
green its people begin to get the idea. What is truly amazing in Costa
Rica is how much of the green identity is put into practice at the
community level with assistance from many local NGOs. I have been
assisting one community association in its search for funding to buy and
expand the last local stands of primary forest (if you know of any good
$$ sources, please let me know). Thus, identity may be more important as
an educational tool than as a policy motivator and as I concluded in my
2000 book, sustainable development ultimately is about changing the
minds of the people,
Cheers,
Neil
From: Adil Najam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ Save Address ]
To: Leonard Hirsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu>
Subject: Re: Green "identity" of states?
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 23:36:13 +0000
Dear all
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 Âimage' 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
-------------------------
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]
From: Adil Najam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ Save Address ]
To: stacy vandeveer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Neil E Harrison <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>, Leonard Hirsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu>
Subject: Re: Green "identity" of states?
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 21:44:07 +0000
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 ÂIslamic' 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 Âdemocracy' and Âfreedom' 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 Âbelieves' 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,
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
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]
