Principled pragmatism in climate policy? The EU and changing practices of climate justice

Climate change constitutes one of the most pressing political problems of our time and has profound implications for global justice. However, despite the recent progress of the international negotiations embodied in the Paris Agreement, most scientists and activists agree that the adopted measures are not adequate or ‘just’ considering the magnitude of the problem. Thus, there is a pressing need for political forerunners that could push the regime towards a more just handling of the problem. The European Union for most of the time has presented itself as a strong advocate for progressive climate action and has been called a climate vanguard or ‘green normative power’. This paper critically assesses the EU's role concerning climate change from a perspective of global political justice, which builds on a tripartite theoretical conception, consisting of ‘non-domination’, ‘impartiality’ and ‘mutual recognition’. It inquires to which conceptions of justice the EU's climate strategy and approach to the international negotiations have corresponded, how and why changes have come about, and whether the EU was able to influence the international regime. The paper finds that while the EU started out from a focus on political measures linked to impartiality, after the failed negotiations in Copenhagen in 2009 it has become more open towards policies and instruments in line with mutual recognition and non-domination. Thus, the emphasis moved away from top-down, legally binding measures, towards voluntary bottom-up procedures, a recognition of difference and diplomatic outreach activities. While this shift was necessary to reinstate the EU's influence and secure the Paris Agreement, it could hamper the quest for robust climate abatement measures and global climate justice.     

Developing ethical geography students? The impact and effectiveness of a tutorial-based approach

This paper explores the effectiveness of a tutorial-based approach in supporting the development of geography undergraduates’ ethical thinking. It was found that overall the intervention had a statistically significant impact on students’ ethical thinking scores as assessed using a Meta-Ethical Questionnaire. The initiative led to a convergence of scores, having a bigger impact on those who had a relatively low score prior to the intervention. Interestingly, the approach had the biggest impact on students who self-identified as physical geographers. Unlike some previous research, there was little evidence of difference between male and female students.     

Reflections on the First Meeting of the WAC Committee of Ethics

WAC needs to recognise that it is not a fully developed organisation but a developing one. There are standpoints or ways-of-thinking in the world which are difficult to perceive through the lens of different customs and/or languages and with which the people in WAC may not be familiar. In addition, we need to follow the laws under which we carry out archaeological activities, so that society can maintain public order. Therefore, when involved in an archaeological activity, we should collect as much information, and as wide a variety of standpoints, as possible, and we should act honestly with respect for law and for human life in the societies in which we work.     

The “War on Terror” and the Military–Archaeology Complex: Iraq, Ethics, and Neo-Colonialism

The archaeological response to the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq is often portrayed as a crusade to rescue antiquities, destroyed either directly by the military action itself or indirectly by the looting of archaeological sites and museums. I argue in this paper that this narrative is awfully inadequate, and masks the ethical and political dimensions at the core of this historical episode. I contend that, in their often well-intended attempts to rescue antiquities, most archaeologists involved have projected a professionalized, apolitical and abstract response, devoid of the social and political context, and based on the fetishisation of a narrowly and problematically defined archaeological record. I argue further that the increasing collaboration of many archaeologists with the invading militaries and occupation authorities since 2003, assisted by the “cultural turn” especially within the US military, have laid the foundations for an emerging military-archaeology complex. I trace the contours of this phenomenon by examining various archaeological and museum discourses and practices. This new development (with historical resonances that go as far back as the 18th century, if not earlier) is linked directly with the ontology and epistemology of archaeology, and deserves further close scrutiny and analysis. The thesis advanced here does not advocate inaction and withdrawal in situations of warfare, but a critical engagement that safeguards the autonomy of the scholar; critiques the political agendas and power structures of contemporary warfare; deconstructs its discursive basis and its ideological overtones; and shows its catastrophic consequences for people and things alike, past and present.     

From “refugee” to “migrant” in Calais solidarity activism: Re-staging undocumented migration for a future politics of asylum

The framing of issues of migration and clandestine travel in the European Union are tied up with a historically-specific ethos towards the outsider, which, after philosopher Jacques Rancière, I term a “count”. The count shaping the interventions of contemporary advocacy and humanitarian groups derives from conceptions of ethics rooted in political modernity, and – for Rancière – are also responsible for foreclosing disruptive appearances of equality. In practice, postures of compassion towards the refugee convert expressions of vocal dissent into matters for moral sympathy. In this paper I explore the implications of this claim for a future politics of asylum, focussing on moments of interruption to an underlying count. I suggest that the staging of the situation of undocumented migrants in Calais through the figure of the migrant rather than the refugee demonstrates a recasting of activism as a form of political listening rather than political speech – in this sense the interventions of anarchistic network No Borders reflect a call for a continuous “recount” of the situation, over an affirmation of a particular framing of the situation. In some ways this call remains problematic, sometimes reframing the voices of local people and migrants according to an external vision of politics. Nevertheless, I hold that this denaturalisation of compassionate hospitality as the only ethical response to asylum is useful in the broader terrain of political dissent, and points to the importance of embodied habit as a locus for enduring social transformations.     

The fusion of law and ethics in cultural heritage management: The 21st century confronts archaeology

Abstract

Archaeologists around the world face complex ethical dilemmas that defy easy solutions. Ethics and law entwine, yet jurisprudence endures as the global praxis for guidance and result. Global legal norms articulate ‘legal rights’ and obligations while codes of professional conduct articulate ‘ethical rights’ and obligations. This article underscores how a rights discourse has shaped the 20th century discipline and practice of archaeology across the globe, including in the design and execution of projects like those discussed in the Journal of Field Archaeology. It illustrates how both law and ethics have been, and still are, viewed as two distinct solution-driven approaches that, even when out of sync, are the predominant frameworks that affect archaeologists in the field and more generally. While both law and ethics are influenced by social mores, public policy, and political objectives, each too often in cultural heritage debates has been considered a separate remedy. For archaeology, there remains the tendency to turn to law for a definite response when ethical solutions prove elusive.

As contemporary society becomes increasingly interconnected and the geo-political reality of the 21st century poses new threats to protecting archaeological sites and the integrity of the archaeological record during armed conflict and insurgency, law has fallen short or has lacked necessary enforcement mechanisms to address on-the-ground realities. A changing global order shaped by human rights, Indigenous heritage, legal pluralism, neo-colonialism, development, diplomacy, and emerging non-State actors directs the 21st century policies that shape laws and ethics. Archaeologists in the field today work within a nexus of domestic and international laws and regulations and must navigate increasingly complex ethical situations. Thus, a critical challenge is to realign approaches to current dilemmas facing archaeology in a way that unifies the ‘legal’ and the ‘ethical’ with a focus on human rights and principles of equity and justice. With examples from around the world, this article considers how law and ethics affect professional practice and demonstrates how engagement with law and awareness of ethics are pivotal to archaeologists in the field.     

Analytic ethics in the central period

Analytic ethics in the central period – extending from the beginning of the twentieth century to post-World War II linguistic analysis – is too often construed by historians and philosophers alike in monolithic terms as the emotivism of A. J. Ayer. In contrast, we argue that a multiplicity of ethical doctrines were developed by analytic philosophers at this time of which Ayer's emotivism was just one. Moreover, we maintain that this multiplicity of ethical doctrines was itself the result of a multiplicity of conceptions of analysis and that connecting these two sets of beliefs makes for the best understanding of analytic ethics.     

G.E. Moore and political philosophy: Gerald F. Shove's fellowship dissertation (1911)

In 1911 Gerald F. Shove, later to become a leading Cambridge economist, submitted to King's College a fellowship dissertation on the application of G.E. Moore's ethical philosophy to political theory. In the article the dissertation, hitherto unpublished, is discussed with reference to both the acceptance and elaboration of Moore's Principia Ethica by the members of the Apostles and Bloomsbury groups and Shove's intellectual and personal biography. The thesis tackles some major concepts in political theory like the nature of human societies, self-government, justice and freedom.     

Reflections on Ethics at Stanford

Mindful of the need to be productive, Ian was caught a bit off-guard by some basic differences of opinion that emerged, specifically concerning WAC’s responsibility to intervene in situations of human rights issues that concern cultural heritage. His own assumptions about the similarity of perspectives on this issue that he expected to find among WAC colleagues were discomforted and challenged by this. Upon reflection, he better understands the historical and contemporary reasons for these differences and took this to be a good lesson in unsettling our assumptions, which is probably what WAC is all about.

---

Résumé Conscient de la nécessité d'être productif, Ian s’est senti un peu pris au dépourvu par l’expression de points de vue largement différents, notamment au sujet de la responsabilité du CMA d'intervenir dans des situations touchant à l’héritage culturel et impliquant la question des Droits de l'Homme. L’idée qu’il se faisait d’une probable convergence d’opinion sur ce sujet parmi les collègues du CMA s’est ainsi trouvée largement mise en doute et fragilisée par ces désaccords. A la réflexion, il comprend mieux les fondements historiques et contemporains à l’origine de ces différences et considère qu’il s’agit d’une bonne expérience incitant à déconstruire nos hypothèses, en accord sans doute avec un certain esprit du CMA.

---

Resumen Preocupadp por la necesidad de ser productivo, Ian fue tomado por sorpresa por algunas diferencias de opiniones que surgieron, especificamente en relación a la responsabilidad del WAC de intervenir en situaciones de los derechos humanos en el tema del patrimonio cultural. Sus propias suposiciones acerca de la similitud de perspectivas que esperaba encontrar en colegas del CAM en este tema ,fueron incomodadas y cuestionadas por esto. Despues de reflexionar sobre el asunto, él comprende mejor las razones históricas y contemporáneas de esas diferencias y considera que es ésta una buena lección para desestabilizar nuestras suposiciones, algo que probablemente sea de lo que se trata el WAC.