Tackling the Leviathan

Environmentalism has now become a universal perspective with so many converging patterns even in such a differentiated world. For many, biodiversity can be best protected by establishment of national parks of US model in those areas where people are still living inside the "wilderness". Even an illiterate third world citizen speaks the same language of neo-Malthusians, "Environment is degrading because of growing population". There are national versions of 350.org with activists displaying 350 placards and reminding the meaning of this very number around the world. Clapp and Dauvergne's travel through the recent history of global environmental politics sheds some lights on the force behind the convergence of environmentalism in such a flat world. As they travel from publication of Silent Spring and Population Bomb to Brundtland report and pass through the gatherings of Stockholm, Rio and Jo'burg, state appears as strong factor on developing environmentalism all over the world, particularly in the third world. All environmental worldviews accept the Leviathan a central character. However, these worldviews differ on what to do with the Leviathan: maintain it, reform it or transform it. For me, state is necessary but not sufficient mechanism to have desirable results of environmental movement. We need engagements at societal level, either to maintain or reform or transform the state. Besides state-society interaction, we also need international regimes, important source of environmental policies in many countries.

As noted by Harris, the state-centric approach has clearly shown limitations on addressing climate change. The limitation is not only on achieving international agreements, but also on framing of justice and equity issues in the north-south dichotomy, which hides so many differences at the sub-national level. We need more actions above and below the state to cure the "cancer of Westphalia". Besides doses of medicine (international agreements and national regulations), treatment of cancer of the later stage usually requires a surgery (reforms and transformations). Therefore, once we postpone tackling the problem now, we have to move from maintaining the Leviathan to reforming it, even further transforming it. Here we need correct diagnoses: at what stage of the cancer are we in so that we determine what to do with it. Diagnosis must include reflections on our moral and political approaches rather than measuring through some science and technology-based indicators. According Falk, Hardin shows a tension between pursuit of private gains and protection of the public good. For example, what would have been the condition of the grazing land when the cattle in the Hardin's story were commons? Can we go towards the shared pursuits? According Falk, the current state system does not allow us to move to that direction. For me, there are possibilities in the current world as we are seeing convergence of several issues including environmentalism.