Vše

Co hledáte?

Vše
Projekty
Výsledky výzkumu
Subjekty

Rychlé hledání

  • Projekty podpořené TA ČR
  • Významné projekty
  • Projekty s nejvyšší státní podporou
  • Aktuálně běžící projekty

Chytré vyhledávání

  • Takto najdu konkrétní +slovo
  • Takto z výsledků -slovo zcela vynechám
  • “Takto můžu najít celou frázi”

"Sinking islands" and the UNSC: Five modalities of mobilising science

Identifikátory výsledku

  • Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11230%2F17%3A10361277" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11230/17:10361277 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Výsledek na webu

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2017.03.027" target="_blank" >http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2017.03.027</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2017.03.027" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.geoforum.2017.03.027</a>

Alternativní jazyky

  • Jazyk výsledku

    angličtina

  • Název v původním jazyce

    "Sinking islands" and the UNSC: Five modalities of mobilising science

  • Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

    Kiribati, Tuvalu, Marshall Islands, the Maldives and other small island developing states in the Pacific are often incorrectly called &quot;sinking islands.&quot; With their highest points just a few meters above sea level, they face adverse impacts from climate change and especially sea level rise, which can cause them to disappear entirely or make their territory uninhabitable. After rather frustrating negotiations on other fora, the representatives of those states asked the UN Security Council to deal with their perilous situation in 2007. On the one hand, some countries used scientific argumentation to justify the introduction of this new security agenda. On the other hand, prominent UNSC members such as China and Russia, supported mainly by rapidly developing large countries, rejected it, arguing that the Security Council did not have the expertise to solve environmental problems. Since then the islands have echoed their plight to the UNSC in 2011 and 2015. This paper determines what roles individual countries ascribe to &quot;experts&quot; and &quot;science&quot; during UNSC negotiations. It examines how the authority of &quot;experts&quot; was exploited, which allowed certain countries to strike the issue of those islands from the UNSC agenda by calling for a more &quot;scientific approach,&quot; while others used &quot;science&quot; to widen the concept of security. The analysis of empirical data confirms the theory of Berling&apos;s three modalities when referring to science. Those modalities can be further extended by Foucault&apos;s conception of &quot;will to truth&quot; as a method of exclusion, and Chandler&apos;s theory of &quot;empire in denial&quot; as a way of evading responsibility, while maintaining power.

  • Název v anglickém jazyce

    "Sinking islands" and the UNSC: Five modalities of mobilising science

  • Popis výsledku anglicky

    Kiribati, Tuvalu, Marshall Islands, the Maldives and other small island developing states in the Pacific are often incorrectly called &quot;sinking islands.&quot; With their highest points just a few meters above sea level, they face adverse impacts from climate change and especially sea level rise, which can cause them to disappear entirely or make their territory uninhabitable. After rather frustrating negotiations on other fora, the representatives of those states asked the UN Security Council to deal with their perilous situation in 2007. On the one hand, some countries used scientific argumentation to justify the introduction of this new security agenda. On the other hand, prominent UNSC members such as China and Russia, supported mainly by rapidly developing large countries, rejected it, arguing that the Security Council did not have the expertise to solve environmental problems. Since then the islands have echoed their plight to the UNSC in 2011 and 2015. This paper determines what roles individual countries ascribe to &quot;experts&quot; and &quot;science&quot; during UNSC negotiations. It examines how the authority of &quot;experts&quot; was exploited, which allowed certain countries to strike the issue of those islands from the UNSC agenda by calling for a more &quot;scientific approach,&quot; while others used &quot;science&quot; to widen the concept of security. The analysis of empirical data confirms the theory of Berling&apos;s three modalities when referring to science. Those modalities can be further extended by Foucault&apos;s conception of &quot;will to truth&quot; as a method of exclusion, and Chandler&apos;s theory of &quot;empire in denial&quot; as a way of evading responsibility, while maintaining power.

Klasifikace

  • Druh

    J<sub>imp</sub> - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

  • CEP obor

  • OECD FORD obor

    50601 - Political science

Návaznosti výsledku

  • Projekt

  • Návaznosti

    S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach

Ostatní

  • Rok uplatnění

    2017

  • Kód důvěrnosti údajů

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku

  • Název periodika

    &quot;Geoforum; journal of physical, human, and regional geosciences&quot;

  • ISSN

    0016-7185

  • e-ISSN

  • Svazek periodika

    84

  • Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

    August

  • Stát vydavatele periodika

    GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

  • Počet stran výsledku

    12

  • Strana od-do

    342-353

  • Kód UT WoS článku

    000408287000038

  • EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

    2-s2.0-85017342556