Universität Wien

210098 VO M4: International Biodiversity Politics: Institutions, Actors, Power Relations (2025W)

4.00 ECTS (2.00 SWS), SPL 21 - Politikwissenschaft
Moodle

An/Abmeldung

Hinweis: Ihr Anmeldezeitpunkt innerhalb der Frist hat keine Auswirkungen auf die Platzvergabe (kein "first come, first served").
Für diese LV an-/abmelden

Details

Sprache: Englisch

Prüfungstermine

Lehrende

Termine (iCal) - nächster Termin ist mit N markiert

  • Dienstag 14.10. 18:30 - 20:00 Hörsaal 7 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 7
  • Dienstag 21.10. 18:30 - 20:00 Hörsaal 7 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 7
  • Dienstag 28.10. 18:30 - 20:00 Hörsaal 7 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 7
  • Dienstag 04.11. 18:30 - 20:00 Hörsaal 7 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 7
  • Dienstag 11.11. 18:30 - 20:00 Hörsaal 7 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 7
  • Dienstag 18.11. 18:30 - 20:00 Hörsaal 7 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 7
  • Dienstag 25.11. 18:30 - 20:00 Hörsaal 7 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 7
  • Dienstag 02.12. 18:30 - 20:00 Hörsaal 7 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 7
  • Dienstag 09.12. 18:30 - 20:00 Hörsaal 7 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 7
  • Dienstag 16.12. 18:30 - 20:00 Hörsaal 7 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 7
  • Dienstag 13.01. 18:30 - 20:00 Hörsaal 7 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 7
  • Dienstag 20.01. 18:30 - 20:00 Hörsaal 7 Hauptgebäude, Hochparterre, Stiege 7

Information

Ziele, Inhalte und Methode der Lehrveranstaltung

This lecture introduces Master students to the basic features of international biodiversity politics, with a specific focus on the institutions, actors, and power relations that have shaped global environmental agreement-making related to the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.

Compared to climate change, the loss of biological diversity is less visible and popular in global environmental politics. However, for the last decade, the study of international biodiversity politics has received new impetus, inter alia because of 1) the increased recognition that biodiversity and climate change must be tackled together, 2) the establishment of new international institutions, and 3) explicit conflicts over the conceptual and political frameworks that should guide international biodiversity politics. Another important factor – and this is one focus of the lecture – is the role economic reasoning and epistemic selectivity have played in reconfiguring biodiversity conservation as a relevant parameter for economic development and human well-being; a development increasingly contested by Indigenous People and local communities, many state actors of the global South, non-state actors, activists, and scientists advocating for new concepts, including “Pachamama”, “Buen Vivir”, and “Nature’s contribution to people” (NCPs) (Stevenson et al., 2021, Vadrot, 2014, 2020; Brand and Vadrot 2013; Borie and Hulme 2015). In this vein, biodiversity politics is increasingly characterized by the struggle over the kinds of values attributed to nature, the forms of knowledge suitable to understand the drivers and causes of biodiversity loss, and the appropriate regulatory frameworks for the equal distribution of the costs and benefits related to biodiversity loss and conservation (Escobar, 1998; Brand and Vadrot, 2013).

Starting from the premise that international biodiversity politics is an increasingly important and contested field of global environmental politics this lecture aims:

1) to introduce students to key actors, institutions, and power relations constituting the field of international biodiversity politics,

2) to familiarize students with historical, institutional, and epistemic developments in the field of international biodiversity politics, illustrating how power relations have shaped

• the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) adopted in 1992, including the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing (adopted in 2010), and the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) adopted in 2022,
• the establishment of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) in 2012, and
• negotiations for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in and beyond national jurisdiction with the adoption of the BBNJ treaty in 2023,

3) to critically discuss recent developments in international biodiversity politics including negotiations on the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), transformative change, and struggle over digital sequence information and access and benefit sharing to (marine) genetic resources.

The course targets Master students interested in the various themes of international biodiversity politics, and global environmental politics more broadly. The course combines theory and practice and is therefore interesting for students that wish to increase their knowledge and skills on how to study the sites, actors, and processes of global environmental agreement-making (Hughes and Vadrot 2023).

Art der Leistungskontrolle und erlaubte Hilfsmittel

Written exam in English composed of:

• 10 multiple choice questions (20 points in total), including questions on the definitions of terms, clarifications of principles and comprehension questions
• 2 open questions (20 points each, 40 points in total)
• 1 opinion question/Essay (40 points).

THIS IS NOT AN OPEN BOOK EXAM!

(only english dictionaries can be used)

Mindestanforderungen und Beurteilungsmaßstab


100 to 90 Points: Very good (1)
89 to 80 Points: Good (2)
79 to 70 Points: Satisfactory (3)
69 to 60 Points: Sufficient (4)
>60 Points: Poor (5)

Prüfungsstoff

• Knowledge about the content of all lectures
• Familiarity with key principles, concepts, terminology, and dates
• Knowledge about the content of the background literature

Literatur

THE FINAL LITERATURE LIST WILL BE AVAILABLE ON MOODLE

Brand, U. and Vadrot, A.B.M. 2013. Epistemic selectivities towards the valorization of nature in the Nagoya Protocol and the making of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). LEAD – Law, Environment and Development Journal, 9 (2), 202-222.
Campbell, L.M. et al. 2022. Architecture and agency for equity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. Earth System Governance, 13, 100144.
CBD 1992. Text of the Convention (https://www.cbd.int/convention/text/)
CBD 2001. Introduction: The Operation of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Handbook of the Convention on Biological Diversity, London & New York: Routledge, xvii-xxvi.
Corson, C. and Iain MacDonald, K. 2012. Enclosing the global commons: the convention on biological diversity and green grabbing. Journal of Peasant Studies, 39 (2), 263-283.
Díaz, S. et al. 2015. The IPBES Conceptual Framework- connecting nature and people. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 14, 1–16.
Escobar, A. 1998. Whose Knowledge, Whose nature? Biodiversity, Conservation, and the Political Ecology of Social Movements. Journal of Political Ecology, 5 (1), 53-82.
Hughes, H. and Vadrot, A.B.M. 2019. Weighting the World: IPBES and the Struggle over Biocultural Diversity. Global Environmental Politics, 19 (2), 14–37.
Keune, et al. 2021. Defining Nature, In: Visseren-Hamakers, I.J. and Kok, M.T.J. (eds.) Transforming Biodiversity Governance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 25-42.
LePrestre, P. 2002. Governing Global Biodiversity. The Evolution and Implementation of the Convention on Biological. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing.
Marion Suiseeya, K.L. 2014. Negotiating the Nagoya Protocol: Indigenous Demands for Justice. Global Environmental Politics 2014, 14 (3), 102–124.
Miller Smallwood, J. et al. 2022. Global Biodiversity Governance: What Needs to Be Transformed? In: Visseren-Hamakers, I.J. and Kok, M.T.J. (eds.) Transforming Biodiversity Governance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 43-66.
Montana, J. 2016. How IPBES works: The functions, structures and processes of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, in C-EENRG Working Papers, no. 2, 10 May 2016.
Raustiala, K., and Victor, D. 2004. The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resources. International Organization, 58(2), 277-309. doi:10.1017/S0020818304582036
Reimerson, E. 2013. Between nature and culture: exploring space for indigenous agency in the Convention on Biological Diversity. Environmental Politics, 22 (6), 992-1009.
Reynolds, J.L. 2020. Governing New Biotechnologies for Biodiversity Conservation: Gene Drives, International Law, and Emerging Politics. Global Environmental Politics 2020, 20 (3), 28–48.
Rosendal, K. 2001. Impacts of Overlapping International Regimes: The Case of Biodiversity. Global Governance, 7 (1), 95-117.
Takacs, D., 1996. The Idea of Biodiversity: Philosophies of Paradise. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
Tessnow-von Wysocki, I and Vadrot, A. B.M. 2020. The Voice of Science on Marine Biodiversity Negotiations: A Systematic Literature Review. Frontiers in Marine Science 7: 614282.
Vadrot, Alice B.M. 2018. Endangered species, biodiversity and the politics of conservation. In Kütting and Herman (eds.) Global Environmental Politics. Concepts, Theories and Case Studies, edited by London & New York: Routledge, 198-226.
Vadrot, A.B.M. 2020. Building authority and relevance in the early history of IPBES. Environmental Science & Policy, 113, 14-20.
Vadrot. A.B.M. The Politics of Knowledge and Global Biodiversity. London and New York: Routledge.
Visseren-Hamakers, I.J. and Kok, M.T.J. (eds.) Transforming Biodiversity Governance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wilson, E.O. 1988. The Current State of Biological Diversity. In: Wilson (ed) Biodiversity, Washington: National Academy Press, 3-18

Zuordnung im Vorlesungsverzeichnis

Letzte Änderung: Fr 23.01.2026 12:06