I would add the environmental security perspective: that some environmental problems have gotten to the point where they can threaten the security of a nation, a region, or the entire international system. Climate change is an excellent case in point, from the melting Arctic to changed disease vector ecology to the possibility of increased nuclear proliferation. In each instance, whether or not the nation has "redefined" security to include non-military threats, climate change will affect national security in ways that national military forces will have to address.
It won't necessarily require a separate module of your course, but you can point out the security ramifications of some of the larger issues (water, food, energy, climate) as you go along. -Beth __________________________ Elizabeth L. Chalecki, PhD Visiting Asst Professor, International Studies Program Boston College 213 Carney Hall 140 Commonwealth Ave., Chestnut Hill, MA 02467 chalecki [at] bc.edu elizabeth.chalecki [at] gmail.com On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Don Munton <mun...@unbc.ca> wrote: > My suggestion for a "key topic" would be that, early on in the course, you > focus on the widespread assumption that "global" environmental politics is > mostly about the problems of cooperating on "commons" (or "common property") > issues, such as ozone depletion and climate change. There are actually very > few true global commons. The upper atmosphere is one of them, along with the > high seas. > > Many of the other issues we talk about in these courses, however, are not > really commons problems. Rather, they are problems that significantly or > mostly fall within national jurisdiction, for which there may or may not be > relevant international environmental regimes (eg, MARPOL, transport of > hazardous wastes, including e-wastes, etc), regimes which may or may not be > effective. > > The common idea that "commons problems" are the most difficult ones to > tackle is, I would argue, not necessarily the case - witness ozone depletion > versus (lack of) cooperation on forests (for many states, a quintessentially > "national" jurisdiction issue). > > I think the commons topic is "key" in the sense it both introduces a basic > concept/question/debate and in the sense that you can keep coming back to it > as you deal with specific issues/cases. > > Don Munton > UNBC > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-gep...@listserve1.allegheny.edu [mailto: > owner-gep...@listserve1.allegheny.edu] On Behalf Of Raul Pacheco-Vega > Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 12:19 AM > To: gep-ed@listserve1.allegheny.edu > Subject: Highly relevant (not-to-be-missed) topics on Global Environmental > Politics? > > Dear all, > > It's been a while since I have participated in the GEP-ED discussions. > Hoping the new semester is treating you well. > > I am hoping to teach for the very first time (fingers crossed) a Special > Topics in International Relations with a focus on Global/International > Environmental Politics this January (undergraduate level). I'm trying to > design the syllabus in a way that I cover *most* of the highly relevant > topics in GEP/IEP. I am hoping to do a cursory review of several > international environmental treaties (Rotterdam, Stockholm, Kyoto and > the Copenhagen COP 15 rounds). > > The question that has had me pondering for the past few weeks has been > whether there are any *key* topics that I should not miss in a course > like this. Climate change seems to have become a predominant topics in > the GEP literature, yet my own research interests (hazardous waste, > toxics, pollutant release inventories, wastewater) drive me to not want > to focus solely on climate change. > > If you teach a GEP/IEP course, which subject topic would you say is "a > must"? > > Thanks! > Raul > > --
