The Politics of Pulp Investment and the Brazilian Landless Movement (MST)

The Politics of Pulp Investment and the Brazilian Landless Movement (MST) The paper industry has been moving more heavily to the global South at the beginning of the 21st century. In a number of cases the rural populations of the global South have engaged in increasingly important resistance in their scuffle with the large-scale tree plantation-relying pulp investment model. The resistance had generally not yet managed to slow down Southern industrial tree plantation expansion until 2004. After all, even the MST, perhaps the strongest of the Southern movements, has limited power in comparison to the corporations pushing for plantation expansion. This thesis shows how, even against these odds, depending on the mechanisms of contention and case-specific conflict dynamics, in some cases the movements have managed to slow and even reverse plantation expansion. The thesis is based on extensive field research in the Brazilian countryside. It outlines a new theory of contentious agency promotion, emphasizing its importance in the shaping of corporate resource exploitation. The thesis includes a Qualitative Comparative Analysis of resistance influence on the economic outcomes of all (14) Brazilian large-scale pulp projects between 2004-2008. The central hypothesis of the thesis is that corporate resource exploitation can be slowed down more effectively and likely when the resistance is based on contentious agency. Contentious agency is created by the concatenation of five mutually supporting mechanisms of contention: organizing and politicizing a social movement; heterodox framing of pulp projects; protesting; networking; and embedding whilst maintaining autonomy. The findings suggest that contentious agency can slow or even reverse the expansion of industrial plantations, whereas when contentious agency promotion was inactive, fast or even unchecked plantation expansion was always the outcome. The rule applied to all the assessed 14 pulp conflict cases. The hypothesis gained strong support even in situations where corporate agency promotion was simultaneously active. In previous studies on social movements, there has been a lack of contributions that help us understand the causal mechanisms of contention influencing economic outcomes. The thesis answers to the call by merging a Polanyian analysis of the political economy with the Dynamics of Contention research program and making a case for the impact of contentious agency on capital accumulation. The research concludes that an efficient social movement can utilize mechanisms of contention to promote the potential of activism among its members and influence investment outcomes. Protesting, for example via pioneering land occupations, seemed to be particularly important. Until now, there has been no comprehensive theory on when and how contentious agency can slow down or reverse the expansion of corporate resource exploitation. The original contribution of this research is to provide such a theory, and utilize it to offer an extensive explanation on the conflicts over pulp investment in Brazil, the globalization of the paper industry, and slowing of industrial plantation expansion in the global South.

Democratic Legitimacy and the Politics of Rights : A comparative analysis of the conceptual relationship between democracy and rights in contemporary political theories

Democratic Legitimacy and the Politics of Rights is a research in normative political theory, based on comparative analysis of contemporary democratic theories, classified roughly as conventional liberal, deliberative democratic and radical democratic. Its focus is on the conceptual relationship between alternative sources of democratic legitimacy: democratic inclusion and liberal rights. The relationship between rights and democracy is studied through the following questions: are rights to be seen as external constraints to democracy or as objects of democratic decision making processes? Are individual rights threatened by public participation in politics; do constitutionally protected rights limit the inclusiveness of democratic processes? Are liberal values such as individuality, autonomy and liberty; and democratic values such as equality, inclusion and popular sovereignty mutually conflictual or supportive? Analyzing feminist critique of liberal discourse, the dissertation also raises the question about Enlightenment ideals in current political debates: are the universal norms of liberal democracy inherently dependent on the rationalist grand narratives of modernity and incompatible with the ideal of diversity? Part I of the thesis introduces the sources of democratic legitimacy as presented in the alternative democratic models. Part II analyses how the relationship between rights and democracy is theorized in them. Part III contains arguments by feminists and radical democrats against the tenets of universalist liberal democratic models and responds to that critique by partly endorsing, partly rejecting it. The central argument promoted in the thesis is that while the deconstruction of modern rationalism indicates that rights are political constructions as opposed to externally given moral constraints to politics, this insight does not delegitimize the politics of universal rights as an inherent part of democratic institutions. The research indicates that democracy and universal individual rights are mutually interdependent rather than oppositional; and that democracy is more dependent on an unconditional protection of universal individual rights when it is conceived as inclusive, participatory and plural; as opposed to robust majoritarian rule. The central concepts are: liberalism, democracy, legitimacy, deliberation, inclusion, equality, diversity, conflict, public sphere, rights, individualism, universalism and contextuality. The authors discussed are e.g. John Rawls, Jürgen Habermas, Seyla Benhabib, Iris Young, Chantal Mouffe and Stephen Holmes. The research focuses on contemporary political theory, but the more classical work of John S. Mill, Benjamin Constant, Isaiah Berlin and Hannah Arendt is also included.

Social Responsibility in Developing New Biotechnology : Interpretations of Responsibility in the Governance of Finnish Biotechnology

The object of the dissertation is to analyse the concept of social responsibility in relation to research and development of new biotechnology. This is done by examining the relevant actors – researchers, administrators, decision-makers, experts, industry, and the public – involved in the Finnish governance of biotechnology through their roles and responsibilities. Existing practises of responsibility in biotechnology governance, as well as the discourses of responsibility – the actors’ conceptions of their own and others responsibilities – are analysed. Three types of responsibility that the actors have assumed are formulated, and the implications of these conceptions to the governance of new biotechnology are analysed. From these different types of responsibility adopted and used by the actors, theoretical models called responsibility chains are constructed. The notion of responsibility is under-theorised in sociology and this research is an attempt to create a mid-range theory of responsibility in the context of biotechnology governance. The research aims to increase understanding of the governance system from a holistic viewpoint by contributing to academic debates on science and technology policy, public understanding of science, commercialisation of research, and corporate social responsibility. With a thorough analysis of the concept of responsibility that is derived from empirical data, the research brings new perspectives into these debates by challenging many normative ideas embedded in discourses. For example, multiple roles of the public are analysed to highlight the problems of consumerism and citizen participation in practise, as well as in relation to different policy strategies. The research examines also the contradictory responsibilities faced by biotechnology researchers, who balance between academic autonomy, commercialisation of research, and reflecting social consequences of their work. Industries responsibilities are also examined from the viewpoint of biotechnology. The research methodology addresses the contradictions between empirical findings, theories of biotechnology governance, and policies in a novel way, as the study concentrates on several actors and investigates both the discourses and the practises of the actors. Thus, the qualitative method of analysis is a combination of discourse and content analysis. The empirical material is comprised of 29 personal interviews as well as documents by Finnish and multinational organizations on biotechnology governance.

The politics of forest bureaucracy as a subject of comparative studies.

XVIII IUFRO World Congress, Ljubljana 1986.

The struggle for protection of environmental refugees: who's responsibility? Discourses from the United Nations and Non-governmental organizations

This thesis identifies, examines and problematizes some of the discourses that have so far come to light on the issue of protection for environmental refugees. By analyzing the discourses produced by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and two non-governmental organizations - the Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF) and Equity and Justice Working Group Bangladesh (EquityBD), I examine the struggling discourses that have emerged about how protection for environmental refugees has been interpreted. To do this, I rely on Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe's theory and method of discourse analysis. The results show that responsibilization is the main point of struggle in the discussions on the protection of environmental refugees. As a floating signifier, it was utilized by the discourses produced by the UNCHR and the selected NGOs in contingent ways and with different political objectives. The UNHCR discourse responsibilized both the environmental refugees for their own protection and the individual states. The EJF and EquityBD, by contrast, allocated responsibility for the protection of environmental refugees to the international community. These contingent understandings of responsibilization necessitated different justifications. While the EJF discourse relied on humanitarianism for the assistance of environmental refugees, the EquityBD discourse constructed a rights based, more permanent solution. The humanitarian based discourse of the EJF was found to be inextricably linked with the neoliberal discourse produced by the UNHCR. Both these discourses encouraged environmental refugees to stay in their homelands, undermining the politics of protection. Another way in which protection was undermined was by UNHCR's discourse on securitization. In this context, climate change induced displacement became threat to developed countries, the global economy and transnational classes. The struggling discourses about who/what has been allocated responsibility for the protection of environmental refugees also meant that identities of the displaced be constructed in specific ways. While the UNHCR discourse constructed as voluntary migrants and predators, the EJF and EquityBD discourses portrayed them as victims. However, even though the EJF discourse constructed them as victims, their reliance on humanitarianism could also be interpreted as a way of giving the environmental refugee a predator like identity. These discourses on responsibilization and identity formation clashed with each other in the aim of achieving a hegemonic position in discussions and debates about the protection of environmental refugees.

The struggle for protection of environmental refugees: who's responsibility? Discourses from the United Nations and Non-governmental organizations

This thesis identifies, examines and problematizes some of the discourses that have so far come to light on the issue of protection for environmental refugees. By analyzing the discourses produced by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and two non-governmental organizations - the Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF) and Equity and Justice Working Group Bangladesh (EquityBD), I examine the struggling discourses that have emerged about how protection for environmental refugees has been interpreted. To do this, I rely on Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe's theory and method of discourse analysis. The results show that responsibilization is the main point of struggle in the discussions on the protection of environmental refugees. As a floating signifier, it was utilized by the discourses produced by the UNCHR and the selected NGOs in contingent ways and with different political objectives. The UNHCR discourse responsibilized both the environmental refugees for their own protection and the individual states. The EJF and EquityBD, by contrast, allocated responsibility for the protection of environmental refugees to the international community. These contingent understandings of responsibilization necessitated different justifications. While the EJF discourse relied on humanitarianism for the assistance of environmental refugees, the EquityBD discourse constructed a rights based, more permanent solution. The humanitarian based discourse of the EJF was found to be inextricably linked with the neoliberal discourse produced by the UNHCR. Both these discourses encouraged environmental refugees to stay in their homelands, undermining the politics of protection. Another way in which protection was undermined was by UNHCR's discourse on securitization. In this context, climate change induced displacement became threat to developed countries, the global economy and transnational classes. The struggling discourses about who/what has been allocated responsibility for the protection of environmental refugees also meant that identities of the displaced be constructed in specific ways. While the UNHCR discourse constructed as voluntary migrants and predators, the EJF and EquityBD discourses portrayed them as victims. However, even though the EJF discourse constructed them as victims, their reliance on humanitarianism could also be interpreted as a way of giving the environmental refugee a predator like identity. These discourses on responsibilization and identity formation clashed with each other in the aim of achieving a hegemonic position in discussions and debates about the protection of environmental refugees.

Despairing Justice and the Ethics of Legal Interpretation

This study discusses legal interpretation. The question is how legal texts, for instance laws, statutes and regulations, can and do have meaning. Language makes interpretation difficult as it holds no definite meanings. When the theoretical connection between semantics and legal meaning is loosened and we realise that language cannot be a means of justifying legal decisions, the responsibility inherent in legal interpretation can be seen in full. We are thus compelled to search for ways to analyse this responsibility. The main argument of the book is that the responsibility of legal interpretation contains a responsibility towards the text that is interpreted (and through the mediation of the text also towards the legal system), but not only this. It is not simply a responsibility to read and read well, but it transcends on a broader scale. It includes responsibility for the effects of the interpretation in a particular situation and with regard to the people whose case is decided. Ultimately, it is a responsibility to do justice. These two aspects of responsibility are conceptualised here as the two dimensions of the ethics of legal interpretation: the textual and the situational. The basic conception of language presented here is provided by Ludwig Wittgenstein s later philosophy, but the argument is not committed to only one philosophical tradition. Wittgenstein can be counterpointed in interesting ways by Jacques Derrida s ideas on language and meaning. Derrida s work also functions as a contrast to hermeneutic theories. It is argued that the seed to an answer to the question of meaning lies in the inter-personal and situated activity of interpretation and communication, an idea that can be discerned in different ways in the works of Wittgenstein, Derrida and Hans-Georg Gadamer. This way the question of meaning naturally leads us to think about ethics, which is approached here through the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas. His thinking, focusing on topics such as otherness, friendship and hospitality, provides possibilities for answering some of the questions posed in this book. However, at the same time we move inside a normativity where ethics and politics come together in many ways. The responsibility of legal interpretation is connected to the political and this has to be acknowledged lest we forget that law always implies force. But it is argued here that the political can be explored in positive terms as it does not have to mean only power or violence.

The Culture of Women's Housework : A Case Study of Bihar, India

This study examines gendered housework in India, particularly in Bihar. The perspective adopted in the study was in part derived from the data but also from sociological literature published both in Western countries and in India. The primary attention is therefore paid to modern and traditional aspects in housework. The aim is not to compare Indian practices to those of Western societies, but rather to use Western studies as a fruitful reference point. In that light, Indian housework practices appear to be traditional. Consequently, traditions are given a more significant role than is usually the case in studies on gendered housework, particularly in Western countries. The study approaches the topic mainly from the socio-cultural perspective; this provides the best means to understand the persistence of traditional habits in India. To get a wide enough picture of the division of labour, three methods were applied in the study: detailed time-use data, questionnaire and theme interviews. The data were collected in 1988 in two districts of Bihar, one rural and the other urban. The different data complement each other well but also bring to light contradictory findings: on a general level Biharian people express surprisingly modern views on gender equality but when talking in more detail (theme interviews) the interviewees told about how traditional housework practices still were in 1988. In the analysis of the data set four principal themes are discussed. Responsibility is the concept by which the study aims at understanding the logic of the argumentation on which the persistence of traditional housework practices is grounded. Contrary to the Western style, Biharian respondents appealed not to the principle of choice but to their responsibility to do what has to be done. The power of tradition, the early socialization of children to the traditional division of labour and the elusive nature of modernity are all discussed separately. In addition to the principle of responsibility, housework was also seen as an expression of affection. This was connected to housework in general but also to traditional practices. The purity principle was the third element that made Biharian interviewees favour housework in general, but as in the case of affection it too was interwoven with traditional practices. It seems to be so that if housework is in general preferred, this leads to preferring the traditional division of labour, too. The same came out when examining economic imperatives. However, the arguments concerning them proved to be rational. In analysing them it became clear that the significance of traditions is also much dependent on the economics: as far as the average income in India is very low, the prevalence of traditional practices in housework will continue. However, to make this work, cultural arguments are required: their role is to mediate more smoothly the iron rules of the economy. Key words: family, gendered housework, division of labour, responsibility, family togetherness, emotion, economy of housework, modernity, traditionality

Regulating Food Consumption : Studies of change and variation in Europe

The role of people as buyers and eaters of food has changed significantly. From being protected by a paternalistic welfare state, people appear to be accorded more freedom and responsibility as individuals, where attention is redirected from the state towards market relations. Many have asserted that these changes are accompanied by fragmentation, individualisation, and privatisation, leading to individual uncertainty and lack of confidence. But empirical observations do not always confirm this, distrust is not necessarily growing and while responsibilities may change, the state still plays an active role. This dissertation explores changing relationships between states and markets, on the one hand, and ordinary people in their capacities as consumers and citizens, on the other. Do we see the emergence of new forms of regulation of food consumption? If so, what is the scope and what are the characteristics? Theories of regulation addressing questions about individualisation and self-governance are combined with a conceptualisation of consumption as processes of institutionalisation, involving daily routines, the division of labour between production and consumption, and the institutional field in which consumption is embedded. The analyses focus on the involvement of the state, food producers and scientific, first of all nutritional, expertise in regulating consumption, and on popular responses. Two periods come out as important, first when the ideas of “designing the good life” emerged, giving the state a very particular role in regulating food consumption, and, second, when this “designing” is replaced by ideas of choice and individual responsibility. One might say that “consumer choice” has become a mode of regulation. I use mainly historical studies from Norway to analyse the shifting role of the state in regulating food consumption, complemented with population surveys from six European countries to study how modernisation processes are associated with trust. The studies find that changing regulation is not only a question of societal or state vs individual responsibilities. Degrees of organisation and formalisation are important as well. While increasing organisation may represent discipline and abuses of power (including exploitation of consumer loyalty), organisation can also, to the consumer, provide higher predictability, systems to deal with malfeasance, and efficiency which may provide conditions for acting. The welfare state and the neo-liberal state have very different types of solutions. The welfare state solution is based on (national) egalitarianism, paternalism and discipline (of the market as well as households). Such solutions are still prominent in Norway. Individualisation and self-regulation may represent a regulatory response not only to a declining legitimacy of this kind of interventionism, but also increasing organisational complexity. This is reflected in large-scale re-regulation of markets as well as in relationships with households and consumers. Individualisation of responsibility is to the consumer not a matter of the number of choices that are presented on the shelves, but how choice as a form of consumer based involvement is institutionalised. It is recognition of people as “end-consumers”, as social actors, with systems of empowerment politically as well as via the provisioning system. ‘Consumer choice’ as a regulatory strategy includes not only communicative efforts to make people into “choosing consumers”, but also the provision of institutions which recognise consumer interests and agency. When this is lacking we find distrust as representing powerlessness. Individual responsibility-taking represents agency and is not always a matter of loyal support to shared goals, but involves protest and creativity. More informal (‘communitarian’) innovations may be an indication of that, where self-realisation is intimately combined with responsibility for social problems. But as solutions to counteract existing imbalances of power in the food market the impacts of such initiatives are probably more as part of consumer mobilisation and politicisation than as alternative provisioning.

Kuka kasvattaa, kuka opettaa? : Genealoginen tutkimus perheen ja koulun välisen kasvatusvastuun politiikasta

FAMILIES AND SCHOOLS AND THE POLITICS OF RESPONSIBILITIES - a genealogical study on family and school as carers and educators of the child population in modern society This study aims to uncover the politics behind such discourses in the media which have claimed the family to be totally responsible for children and which ignore the various responsibilities accorded to the state in matters concerning the child population. Using Max Weber s and Michael Mann s theorizing on the history of power relationships, feminist social history on patriarchy and Foucauldian power analytic concept of dispositif the study traces two competing child policies which have influenced the historical formation of modern generational order in Western societies. One of them is based on the interests of the hegemonic bourgeois elite and the other on the interests of the non-elite population, which were expressed during the phase of building the welfare state in Finland in the 1960 1980 s. The central strategies of the bourgeois child policy are 1) to construct the childhood years as a time for preparation and formation of the individual according to the interests of the elite, 2) to construct the family as the sole site of holistic care and responsibility of children in society, and 3) compulsory schooling of children of the non-elite population in state organized schools. To implement these strategies the elite uses strategically patriarchal cultural formations/dispositifs in modernized versions. The result has been the formation of a sexually divided and hierarchical order of care and education, where, on the one hand, there is the less important feminine care of children done by mothers at home and, on the other, the real education of the school, where children are made the object of authoritarian shaping and where the needs and the personal experiences of the child are ignored. The welfare order of care and education is based on the ethos of welfare society, where the state and the families are seen to share the responsibility for the child population. In this vein, families and schools are seen as partners who both have a caring attitude to children s welfare and learning. The study shows that discourses and terminology in the mainstream educational policy texts in Finland create a chaotic linguistic game which makes it difficult to have a rational discussion about the roles of family and school in the holistic care and education of children. This has opened the door to political discourses where familist interpretations of the question of responsibility are claimed to be based on law.

On the discursive construction of success/failure in narratives of post-merger integration

This article concentrates on the discursive constmction of success and failure in narratives of post-merger integration. Drawing on extensive interview material from eight Finnish-Swedish mergers and acquisitions, the empirical analysis leads to distinguishing four types of discourse — 'rationalistic', 'cultural', 'role-bound' and 'individualistic' — that narrators employ in recounting their experiences. In particular, the empirical material illustrates how the discursive frameworks enable specific (di.scursive) strategies and moves for (re)framing the success/failure, justification/legitimization of one's own actions, and (re)constniction of responsibility when dealing with socio-psychological pressures associated with success/failtire. The analysis also suggests that, as a result of making use of these discursive strategies and moves, success stories are likely to lead to overly optimistic or, in the case of failure stories, overly pessimistic views on the management's ability to control these change processes. Tliese findings imply that we should take the discursive elements that both constrain our descriptions and explanations seriously, and provide opportunities for more or less intentional (re)interpretations of postmerger integration or other organizational change processes.

Whose ETSIP? National and local ownership of Namibia's education and training sector improvement programme

Tämä työ tarkastelee kansallista ja paikallista omistajuutta Namibian opetussektorin kehittämisohjelmassa. Opetussektorin kehittämisohjelma ETSIP on 15-vuotinen sektoriohjelma vuosille 2005-2015 ja sen tavoitteena on edesauttaa Namibian kehittymistä tietoyhteiskunnaksi. Tutkimuksen tarkoituksena on selvittää miten kansallinen ja paikallinen omistajuus on toteutunut ETSIP prosessin aikana. Erityisesti pyritään selvittämään paikallistason opetussektorin virkamiesten näkemyksiä ETSIP prosessista, heidän roolistaan siinä ja siitä millaisia vaikuttamisen ja hallinnan mahdollisuuksia heillä on ollut prosessin aikana. Tutkimuksen lähtökohta on laadullinen ja lähestymistapa konstruktionistinen: tutkimus tarkastelee todellisuutta ihmisten kokemusten, näkemysten ja toiminnan kautta. Tutkimusaineisto koostuu haastatteluista, epävirallisista keskusteluista, lehtiartikkeleista ja ETSIP dokumenteista. Tutkimus osoittaa että kansallinen omistajuus on epämääräinen käsite sillä kansallisia toimijoita ja näkemyksiä on useita. Tutkimus vahvistaa Castel-Brancon huomion siitä, että omistajuutta on tarkasteltava kontekstissaan: muuttuvana ja kilpailtuna. ETSIPin rinnalle ollaan valmistelemassa uutta strategista ohjelmaa opetusministeriölle mikä saattaa muuttaa omistajuutta ETSIPiin. ETSIP dokumenttien omistajuusretoriikka myötäilee kansainvälisiä sitoumuksia avun vaikuttavuuden parantamiseksi mutta niistä puuttuu syvällisempi analyysi siitä, miten kansallinen ja paikallinen omistajuus toteutuisi käytännössä. Avunantajien näkemys omistajuudesta on suppea: omistajuus nähdään lähinnä sitoutumisena ennalta määrättyyn politiikkaohjelmaan. Haastatteluaineistosta nousee esiin Whitfieldin ja Frazerin jaottelu suppeista ja laajoista omistajuuskäsityksistä. Sitoutumista ETSIP ohjelmaan pidetään tärkeänä mutta riittämättömänä määritteenä omistajuudelle. Paikallisella tasolla sitoutuminen ETSIP ohjelman periaatteisiin ja tavoitteisiin on toteutunut melko hyvin mutta jos omistajuutta tarkastellaan laajemmin vaikutusvallan ja hallinnan käsitteiden kautta voidaan todeta että omistajuus on ollut heikkoa. Paikallisella tasolla ei ole ollut juurikaan vaikutusvaltaa ETSIP ohjelman sisältöön eikä mahdollisuutta hallita ohjelman toteutusta ja päättää siitä mitä hankkeita ohjelman kautta rahoitetaan. Tujanin demokraattisen omistajuuden käsite kuvaa tarvetta muuttaa ja laajentaa omistajuusajattelua huomioiden paikallisen tason paremmin. Tämä tutkimus viittaa siihen että omistajuuden toteutuminen paikallisella tasolla edellyttäisi institutionaalisen kulttuurin muutosta ja institutionaalisen legitimiteetin vahvistamista. Omistajuuden mahdollistamiseksi paikallisella tasolla tarvittaisiin poliittista johtajuutta, luottamusta, vastuullisuuden kulttuurin kehittämistä, tehokkaampaa tiedonjakoa, laajaa osallistumista, vuoropuhelua ja yhteistyötä. Ennen kaikkea tarvittaisiin paikallisen tason vaikutusvaltaa päätöksenteossa ja kontrollia resurssien käytöstä. Tälle muutokselle on selvä tarve ja tilaus.