Sörlin Sverker, Warde Paul, Akerman Isobel, Höglund Hellgren Jasmin, Höhler Sabine, Isberg Erik, Paglia Eric, Samosír Gloria, Schrøder Thomas Harbøll
Division of History of Science, Technology and Environment, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Teknikringen 74D, 100 44, Stockholm, Sweden.
Center for History and Economics, and Faculty of History, University of Cambridge, West Road, Cambridge, CB3 9EF, UK.
Ambio. 2025 Aug;54(8):1267-1288. doi: 10.1007/s13280-025-02177-x. Epub 2025 May 3.
This article presents a new way of understanding Global Environmental Governance (GEG), historically and functionally. We outline a revised analytical framing, which connects the post-WWII moment of early globalizing conservation with the intensifying attempts to govern the human-earth relationship through an ever-growing assemblage of governable environmental objects and their quantifiable indicators as proxies. Our argument is as follows: (1) GEG has followed a trajectory of dispersal of actors, institutions, conceptual tools and responsibilities from the micro- and local scales to the planetary. We analyze how these trajectories unfold in three essential domains: Earth System science, sovereignty, and neoliberalization. (2) GEG is performative. The governance itself has created the dynamic environmental objects under governance. (3) In this way, GEG has normalized the environment as a policy object.
本文从历史和功能角度提出了一种理解全球环境治理(GEG)的新方法。我们勾勒了一个经过修订的分析框架,该框架将二战后早期全球化保护的时刻与通过不断增加的可治理环境对象及其可量化指标作为代理来管理人类与地球关系的强化尝试联系起来。我们的论点如下:(1)全球环境治理遵循了行为体、机构、概念工具和责任从微观和地方层面扩散到全球层面的轨迹。我们分析这些轨迹如何在三个基本领域展开:地球系统科学、主权和新自由主义化。(2)全球环境治理具有能动性。治理本身创造了被治理的动态环境对象。(3)通过这种方式,全球环境治理已将环境作为一个政策对象常态化。