IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/glenvp/v4y2004i4p36-53.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Three-Not Two-Major Environmental Counternarratives to Globalization

Author

Listed:
  • Emery Roe
  • Michel J.G. van Eeten

Abstract

Opposition to globalization by environmentalists tends to fall into two camps: a so-called "green" counternarrative and an "ecological" one. The green counter-narrative assumes that we have already witnessed sufficient harm done to the environment due to globalization and thus prescribes taking action now to oppose further globalizing forces. It is confident in its knowledge about the causes of environmental degradation as they relate to globalization and certain in its wholesale opposition to globalization. In contrast, the ecological counter-narrative is less certain about globalization's record of environmental harm but worries about future threats given the scale and intensity of globalization's increasing reach. Rather than call for immediate action and wholesale opposition, it seeks further research to identify-and specific policy initiatives to avoid- potentially massive but as yet unknown effects of globalization on the environment. Policy analysts opposing globalization are caught between the counter-narratives and often subscribe to elements of each. The challenge is to find another, more compelling counternarrative in which real-time environmental harm can be treated more seriously than it is in either of the two primary counterparts. Copyright (c) 2004 Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Emery Roe & Michel J.G. van Eeten, 2004. "Three-Not Two-Major Environmental Counternarratives to Globalization," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 4(4), pages 36-53, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:tpr:glenvp:v:4:y:2004:i:4:p:36-53
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1162/glep.2004.4.4.36
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpr:glenvp:v:4:y:2004:i:4:p:36-53. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kelly McDougall (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://direct.mit.edu/journals .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.