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.

Governmental rationalities and the local dimension of European politics. A study of the Interreg IV programme "Alpenrhein-Bodensee-Hochrhein"

The thesis aims at investigating the local dimension of the EU cohesion policy through the utilization of an alternative approach, which aims at the analysis of discourse and structures of power. The concrete case under analysis is the Interreg IV programme “Alpenrhein-Bodensee-Hochrhein”, which is conducted in the border region between Germany, Switzerland, Austria and the principality of Liechtenstein. The main research question is stated as such: What governmental rationalities can be found at work in the field of EU cross-border cooperation programmes? How is directive action and cooperation envisioned? How coherent are the different rationalities, which are found at work? The theoretical framework is based on a Foucaultian understanding of power and discourse and utilizes the notion of governmentalities as a way to de-stabilize the understanding of directive action and in order to highlight the dispersed and heterogeneous nature of governmental activity. The approach is situated within the general field of research on the European Union connected to basic conceptualisations such as the nature of power, the role of discourse and modes of subjectification. An approach termed “analytics of government”, based on the work of researchers like Mitchell Dean is introduced as the basic framework for the analysis. Four dimensions (visiblities, subjectivities, techniques/practices, problematisations) are presented as a set of tools with which governmental regimes of practices can be analysed. The empirical part of the thesis starts out with a discussion of the general framework of the European Union's cohesion policy and places the Interreg IV Alpenrhein-Bodensee-Hochrhein programme in this general context. The main analysis is based on eleven interviews which were conducted with different individuals, participating in the programme on different levels. The selection of interview partners aimed at maximising heterogeneity through including individuals from all parts of the programme region, obtaining different functions within the programme. The analysis reveals interesting aspects pertaining to the implementation and routine aspects of work within initiatives conducted under the heading of the EU cohesion policy. The central aspects of an Interreg IV Alpenrhein-Bodensee-Hochrhein – governmentality are sketched out. This includes a positive perception of the work atmosphere, administrative/professional characterisation of the selves and a de-politicization of the programme. Characteristic is the experience of tensions by interview partners and the use of discoursive strategies to resolve them. Negative perceptions play an important role for the specific governmental rationality. The thesis contributes to a better understanding of the local dimension of the European Union cohesion policy and questions established ways of thinking about governmental activity. It provides an insight into the working of power mechanisms in the constitution of fields of discourse and points out matters of practical importance as well as subsequent research questions.

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.