Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Global Focus Author Amanda Pearson

1. Pursuing Sustainability—Connecting Science and Practice

Author:
Megan Margulies and Amanda Pearson
Publication Date:
04-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon on Friday will welcome 130 heads of state who have pledged to sign the Paris Agreement, the UN global agreement on managing climate change. For William Clark, Harvey Brooks Professor of International Science, Public Policy, and Human Development at Harvard Kennedy School (HKS), sustainability is a global imperative and a scientific challenge like no other. He sees the Paris Agreement as just one step, though an important one, in this urgent pursuit, as officials wrestle with how to meet the needs of a growing human population without jeopardizing the planet for future generations. Clark and co-authors Pam Matson of Stanford University and Krister Andersson of University of Colorado at Boulder, tackle that issue in a new book, Pursuing Sustainability: A Guide to the Science and Practice. By looking at sustainability as a means to alleviate poverty and enhance well-being, the book highlights the complex dynamics of social-environmental systems, and suggests how successful strategies can be shaped through collaborations among researchers and practitioners. Clark, who trained as an ecologist, said that while exhausting Earth’s natural resources would jeopardize future generations, sustainability could be achieved to counter that. The goal is to find a healthy equilibrium between human adaptation and natural evolution. Co-director of the Sustainability Science Program at HKS, Clark spoke with the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs about building a more sustainable future.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, United Nations, and Sustainability
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. Banners, Barricades, and Bombs: How Social Movements Affect Public Opinion

Author:
Amanda Pearson
Publication Date:
05-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
It’s an argument we’ve heard before: governments should not negotiate with terrorist organizations that engage in violent activity. This idea is pervasive throughout the academic and policy worlds, but what about public opinion? Do citizens think the government should shun social movements that adopt extreme tactics often associated with terrorist organizations? Social protest takes various forms, and organized social movements have various intentions—from benign disruption to purposeful violence. In their forthcoming paper for Comparative Political Studies, Connor Huff and Dominika Kruszewska look at how the tactical choices of social movements affect public opinion about whether or not—and to what degree—governments should negotiate with social movements.1 In research involving 2,000 Polish citizens, Huff and Kruszewska document what many already believe: people were approximately 30% less likely to support government negotiations with organizations that use bombs compared with occupations. “Our results show that public support decreases for both separatist organizations and social movements that adopt bombing as a tactic when compared against occupations and demonstrations,” they write. The researchers find mixed support for whether respondents think organizations that use bombings should receive fewer concessions once negotiations begin.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Terrorism, Social Movement, Protests, Violence, and Demonstrations
Political Geography:
Global Focus