Wann: Montag, 29.05.2013 2013,16 bis 18 Uhr
Wo: Henry Ford Bau, Garystr. 35, 14195
Robyn Eckersley is a Professor in Political Science in the School of Social and Political Sciences at the University of Melbourne. She was Head of the Discipline of Political Science from 2008-2010 and Director of the University of Melbourne’s Master of International Relations program from 2011-2012. She is a Fellow of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia and served as the Arne Naess Chair in Global Justice and the Environment at the University of Oslo, November 2010 to January 2011.
She has published widely in the fields of environmental politics, political theory and international relations, with a special focus on climate change. Her recent books in include Special Responsibilities: Global Problems and American Power (2012, co-author); Why Human Security Matters (2012, co-editor) and Globalization and the Environment (2013) (co-author). Her current research projects include an examination of the interplay between the trade and climate regimes and a five country comparative study on ‘What makes a climate leader?: Developed countries’ responsibilities under the international climate regime’.
Leadership is widely recognised as necessary to break the massive collective action problem presented by climate change, and the language of leaders and laggards has been routinely invoked to judge states in international climate diplomacy and national climate policy. Yet scholarly debates about what makes a leader, what evidence counts as leadership, and whether leadership makes a difference, are much less clear cut. This paper draws on the case study of the EU to provide a conceptualization of leadership that shows that it does matter some of the time, while also accounting for the EU’s shifting authority in the climate negotiations. Leadership in international negotiations is conceptualised as a distinctive type of legitimate power that entails the socialization and mobilization of others towards the achievement of a shared purpose. Leaders and followers constitute a ‘leadership sphere’, which is a distinctive social structure that is distinguishable from traditional ‘spheres of influence’. I show how the relative success of such any given leadership sphere in achieving the common purpose depends on the extent to which states with the relevant problem solving capabilities lie inside or outside the sphere.
29.05.2013 | 16:00 - 18:00