International Relations theoretical to climate change
Which International Relations theoretical approaches takes climate change most seriously?
1. Each essay assignment will ask you to make an argument in answer to the question set, drawing on lectures, required readings, and supplementary readings (which may extend beyond the materials listed here). A mere summary of lectures and readings is not sufficient.
2. In making your argument, you will be expected to draw on and engage critically with the relevant conceptual and theoretical frameworks, as well as empirical materials as appropriate. It is not sufficient to draw on only one concept or theory; you will also be expected to show why other competing concepts or theories are not relevant or are inadequate as frameworks for answering the question.
3. Assigned marks will reflect the overall clarity and cogency of the argument advanced and its appropriateness as an answer to the question set, with particular reference to:
a. the thesis statement – this is your argument/answer to the question. The introduction to your essay must contain a thesis statement and an outline of the organisation of your essay
b. understanding of the concepts/theories discussed and ability critically to apply them. These are short essays so it is not possible or necessary to lay out the assumptions of the concepts or theories you are discussing in all their details. However, when using concepts and theories you must use them correctly, i.e., in a manner that demonstrates you understand what they mean and how they work.
c. ability to draw on appropriate empirical materials and integrate them coherently into the overall argument. Again, these are short essays so it is unlikely you will spend a large part of the essay laying out an empirical case. However, you will need to make reference to empirical materials and when you do it is necessary to use them appropriately – i.e., demonstrating where and how they relate to your overall argument.
d. ability to draw appropriate implications from positions advanced. This means showing where and how your argument relates to the question posed – i.e., how the points you have made individually or together lead to a conclusion that supports your overall argument/thesis. Think of this as a kind of sign-posting: telling the reader where you are in the argument and how the point just made relates to your overall thesis.
e. the coherence of the conclusion with the overall argument. Your essay must contain a conclusion. The conclusion should follow logically from your argument – put another way, in your introduction you should state your thesis/argument; in the body of your essay you should develop your argument – i.e., show to the reader the reasoning process you have gone through that leads you to the position you hold, i.e., your thesis; and in the conclusion re-state your position and, if appropriate, draw out any wider implications it might have.
Recommended resources for the essay:
Harrington, C. ‘The Ends of the World: International Relations and the Anthropocene’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies 44/3 (2016): 478–498.
Merino, R. ‘An alternative to “alternative development”: Buen vivir and human development in Andean countries’, Oxford Development Studies 44/3 (2016): 271-86.
Kumarakulasingam, N. and Ngcoya, M. ‘Plant provocations: Botanical Indigeneity and (De)colonial Imaginations’, Contexto Internacional 38/3 (2016): http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-85292016000300843&lng=en&nrm=iso
Atkins, E. and G. Sosa-Nunez, Environment, Climate Change and International Relations (E-International Relations Publishing, 2016) http://www.e-ir.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Environment-Climate-Change-and-IR-E-IR.pdf.
Braidotti, R., The Posthuman (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2013).
Burke, A., S. Fishel, A. Mitchell, S. Dalby, and D. Levine, ‘Planet Politics: A Manifesto from the end of IR,’ Millennium: Journal of International Studies 44/3 (2016): 499-523.
Cudworth, E. and S. Hobden, Posthuman International Relations: Complexity, Ecologism, and Global Politics (London: Zed Books, 2011).
Cudworth, E. and S. Hobden, ‘Civilisation and the Domination of the Animal’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 42/3 (2014): 746-66.
Dalby, S. ‘Anthropocene Geopolitics: Globalisation, Empire, Environment and Critique,’ Geography Compass 1 (2007): 103–118.
Dalby, S. ‘Framing the Anthropocene: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly’, The Anthropocene Review 3/1 (2016): 33-51.
Ghosh, A., The Great Derangement: Climate Change and the Unthinkable (London: Penguin, 2016).
Grieves, V. ‘Nature in the culture of cities: Indigenous peoples, immigrants and reflections on Harlem NYC as the pointy end of the Anthropocene’, https://www.academia.edu/31065307/Nature_in_the_culture_of_cities_Indigenous_peoples_immigrants_and_reflections_on_Harlem_NYC_as_the_pointy_end_of_the_Anthropocene.
Grove, J. ‘Ecology as a critical security method,’ Critical Studies on Security 2/3 (2014): 366-369.
Keohane, R.O. ‘The Global Politics of Climate Change: Challenge for Political Science,’ PS: Political Science & Politics 48/1 (2015): 19-26.
Kolbert, E. The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History (New York: Henry Holt, 2014).
Mayer, M. ‘Chaotic Climate Change and Security,’ International Political Sociology 6/2 (2012): 165-185.
Parsons, R.J. ‘Climate Change: The Hottest Issue in Security Studies?’ Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy 1 (2010): 87–116.
Purdy, J. After Nature: A Politics for the Anthropocene (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2015).
Vince, G. Adventures in the Anthropocene: A Journey to the Heart of the Planet We Made (London: Chatto & Windus, 2014).
Todd, Z. ‘Fish, Kin and Hope:
Tending to Water Violations in amiskwaciwâskahikan and
Treaty Six Territory’, Afterall: A Journal of Art,
Context and Enquiry 43 (2017).
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!