Interventions in Governance

Co-facilitators: C. Gauthier and D. McCormack

Readings: (1) “Solar Panels and Sisterhood” (Emilee Gilpin), (2) “1 – Introduction: opportunity from crisis” (from Edward B. Barbier’s A Global Green New Deal)


 

 
 

The second session in the “Interventions” module, this session supported participants in understanding the ways in which governance mechanisms perpetuate racialized climate issues. Co-facilitators Gauthier and McCormack worked together to introduce participants to political philosophies on governance and the role of the state. Participants then analyzed two examples of governance-based climate solutions before reflecting on different governance-based interventions in the state, international, and alternative spheres.



Understanding the political philosophies of governance

Exploring two case studies of governance-based climate solutions

Reflecting on governance-based interventions to climate change


 

 
 

Slides from “Interventions in Governance”


The following slides were prepared by co-facilitators Gauthier and McCormack to support participants in understanding the unique role of state and non-state governance mechanisms in the phenomenon of climate change. Unlike most other members of the group, the co-facilitators of this session had a strong background in political theory. They used this knowledge to introduce Conversations participants to the philosophical underpinnings of governance and the ways in which governance is tied to root causes of climate change and racism.




 
 
 

 
 

Two case studies of governance-based climate solutions


To familiarize participants of Conversations with the role of governance in racialized climate issues, Gauthier and McCormack led the group through two case studies: (1) the Global Green New Deal (from “1 – Introduction: opportunity from crisis” by Edward B. Barbier’s A Global Green New Deal) and (2) solar energy in Secwepemc
Nation (from “Solar Panels and Sisterhood” by Emilee Gilpin).


 
 

 
 

Brainstorming interventions in state, international, and alternative governance systems


Returning to the theoretical framework of the Inequalitree, Gauthier and McCormack led the group through a brainstorming session on governance interventions for a livable 2100 climate. Together, the group identified existing governance structures and brainstormed strategic interventions at the impact, structure, and ideology level for state, international, and alternative governance systems.


The following images show the brainstorming done by participants of Conversations. Please note the first column lists existing governance mechanisms and the second column lists governance-based climate interventions.


 

Alternative governance systems

Discussing governance in the alternative sphere, participants made note of the place-based/land-based nature of existing alternative governance structures. Participants also brainstormed existing movements that embody alternative governance practices. Though the group was able to identify impact-level and structure-level alternative governance mechanisms with ease, participants struggled to articulate the root cause ideologies behind alternative governance interventions.


 

State governance systems

Discussing state governance, participants noted that state actors are often implicated in racialized climate issues. Participants also discussed the failure of state interventions such as the Green New Deal to address root causes of racialized climate issues.


 

International governance systems

Please note: transnational corporation (TNC), structural adjustment program (SAP), United Nations (UN), International Monetary Fund (IMF), United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), World Health Organizations (WHO), International Criminal Court (ICC)

Participants noted that both alternative and international governance systems technically operate beyond the borders of nation-states, but state actors make national borders fluid for international governance programs while fortifying those same borders against the activities of alternative systems. Participants hypothesized that this is due to the alignment in root cause ideologies of state and international actors and the tension between root cause ideologies of state and alternative actors.