Earth System Governmentality Reflections on Science in The

Global Environmental Change 19 (2009) 7–13 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Global Environmental Change journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/gloenvcha Earth System governmentality Reflections on science in the Anthropocene Eva Lo¨vbrand a,*, Johannes Stripple b,c, Bo Wiman d a Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, The Tema Institute, Linko¨ping University, 601 74 Norrko¨ping, Sweden b Department of Political Science, Lund University, Box 52, 221 00 Lund, Sweden c Lund University Centre for Sustainability Studies, Sweden d School of Pure and Applied Natural Sciences, Kalmar University, 39182 Kalmar, Sweden ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article history: This paper examines Earth System Science as a novel approach to global environmental change research. Received 27 May 2008 Drawing upon Michel Foucault’s governmentality concept, the paper opens up the Earth System Received in revised form 13 October 2008 metaphor to political analysis and asks what it does to our understanding of nature and society as a Accepted 20 October 2008 governable domain. We trace the scientific practices that have produced the Earth System as a thinkable analytical category back to the International Geophysical Year in 1957. We also identify ‘the Keywords: Anthropocene’ as a central and yet ambiguous system of thought for Earth System Science that Earth System Science harbours different strategies for sustainability in terms of (1) the persons over whom government is to be Governmentality Anthropocene exercised; (2) the distribution of tasks and actions between authorities; and (3) contrasting ideals or The coupled human and ecological system principles for how government should be directed. Global environmental change research ß 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction been described as a striving to perceive the big picture; to map, monitor and manage the ‘coupled human and ecological system’ Since the late 1980s when NASA launched Earth System Science (Steffen et al., 2004; Schellnhuber et al., 2005; Kotchen and Yong, as a structuring concept for its future research activities (see 2007; Moore III, 2000). Johnson et al., 1997), a seemingly new way of understanding and This paper aims to initiate a discussion on what this new studying the Earth and environmental change has gained ground approach to global environmental change research does to our among scientific institutions around the world. Building upon a understanding of nature and society as a governable domain. We view from space provided by remote sensing technology, global base the analysis on a number of programmatic writings for Earth databases and sophisticated computer models, Earth System System Science published in the years prior to and after the official Science is now emerging as a holistic super-discipline that tries launch of the Earth System Partnership in Amsterdam in July 2001. to embrace all processes in nature and society as one interlinked In line with studies of Earth System governance, we approach the system (Steffen and Tyson, 2001; Clifford and Richards, 2005). practices of science as one of many rule systems and actor- According to Schellnhuber (1999), one of the main advocates of networks that shape the ‘co-evolution of human and natural this new scientific approach, the Earth System consists of two main systems’ (Biermann, 2007, p. 4). However, rather than accepting components; the ‘ecosphere’ and its subsystems such as the the Earth System metaphor as a given starting point for our atmosphere, biosphere and cryosphere, and the ‘Anthroposphere’ analysis, this paper sets out to critically examine its basic that accounts for all human activity. Instead of studying each assumptions and political implications. Hence, in contrast to subsystem as a self-contained entity, this new ‘science of recent celebrations of the ‘coupled human and ecological systems’ integration’ (Steffen and Tyson, 2001, p. 23) seeks to put the approach to global environmental change research (Kotchen and pieces together and to understand the planetary life-support Yong, 2007; Biermann, 2007; Moore III, 2000), we take a step back system as an integrated whole. Hence, Earth System Science has and ask what ways of seeing and acting upon nature and society this new research agenda makes possible. Methodologically, we do so by advancing the concept ‘Earth System governmentality’. * Corresponding author. Tel.: + 46 11 363393. Since first introduced by Michel Foucault in the late 1970s, E-mail address: [email protected] (E. Lo¨vbrand). governmentality studies have evolved across numerous disciplines 0959-3780/$ – see front matter ß 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.10.002 8 E. Lo¨vbrand et al. / Global Environmental Change 19 (2009) 7–13 such as sociology, criminology, science and technology studies, Earth System governance. It also points to the need for a critical human geography and cultural studies (Rose et al., 2006). As research agenda that opens up the practices of science to political indicated by the semantic linking of the words governing and analysis. Rather than accepting the Earth System metaphor as a mentality, governmentality deals with how we think about taken-for-granted starting point for future global environmental governing. It is a field of enquiry that problematises the collective change research, we invite more scholars to critically reflect upon and often taken-for-granted systems of thought that make which political spaces it renders thinkable and governable. governing strategies appear natural and given at certain times in history (Dean, 2004, p. 16; MacKinnon, 2000; Lemke, 2002). 2. What is a Foucauldian analytics of government? Governmentality studies are therefore often empirical and historical in their orientation. By ‘tracing the history of the The governmentality concept was first introduced by Michel present’ (Miller and Rose, 2008), this perspective aims to ‘open a Foucault in a series of lectures at Colle`ge de France in Paris in the space for critical thought’ (Rose, 2004, p. 19) without advancing a late 1970s. While Foucault used the concept to trace a number of normative agenda of its own. Furthermore, governmentality historically specific rationalities of forms of rule tied to the modern scholars tend to approach government in a broad and dispersed European state (see Foucault’s lectures in Burchell et al., 1991; sense. Rather than reducing political power to the actions of a state, Foucault et al., 2007), his neologism has today emerged as a new this analytical perspective recognises that a whole variety of mode of analysis. Governmentality as an analytical concept authorities govern at different sites, in the light of different combines two aspects of governing: (1) the representation and principles, knowledges and practices (Rose et al., 2006). This focus knowing of a phenomenon, and (2) the acting upon the same on heterogeneous forms of governing resonates with studies of phenomenon so as to transform it. Miller and Rose (2008, p.15) global governance. However, while the governance concept is have called the former aspect ‘rationalities of government’, and the concerned with the loci and modes of governing, the govern- latter ‘technologies of government’. Rationalities of government mentality concept draws attention to the systematic thinking that specify the distribution of tasks and actions between authorities renders different governing strategies possible. (e.g. political, spiritual, military, familial) and articulate which This paper draws upon the emerging field of governmentality ideals or principles that should direct government (e.g. freedom, studies to explore how the seemingly neutral practices of Earth justice, responsibility, growth). Such systems of thought also System Science are tied to the governing of nature and society. Our identify the nature of the objects to be governed (e.g. society, the analysis is organised as follows. After a brief introduction to the nation, the population, the economy) and express an account of the governmentality concept, we begin by examining the practical persons over whom government is to be exercised (e.g. a flock to be aspects of Earth System Science. Attention is here drawn to the led, legal subjects with rights, a resource to be exploited) (Rose and advanced ‘Earth System toolkit’ (Steffen and Tyson, 2001)of Miller, 1992, p. 178–179). Whereas rationalities of government modelling, remote sensing and in situ methods and techniques that hereby render reality into the domain of thought, technologies of has produced the ‘coupled human and ecological system’ as a government translate thought into the domain of reality (Miller thinkable and governable domain. We trace this scientific and Rose, 2008, p. 32). approach back to the International Geophysical Year in 1957 Hence, government technologies refer to the complex of and its path-breaking international coordination of geophysical techniques, procedures, mechanisms and documents through studies and data. We also draw on early 20th Century writings in which the government of persons and populations is accomplished ecology and biogeochemistry, as well as historical accounts of the (Dean, 1996). While this technological aspect of government can ‘world modelling’ of the early 1970s. Secondly, we ask ourselves be conceived instrumentally as a means for action and interven- what mentality or political rationality that underpins this new tion, Dean (1996, p. 61) has suggested that it is better understood

Load more