Environmental Politics

Week in review for Environmental Politics The Friday Post

Week in review! Subscribe to our Substack for a short weekly round up.

This week we have published a new article and a guest post.

open.substack.com/pub/environm...

Week in review for Environmental Politics The Friday Post

Week in review! Subscribe to our Substack for a short weekly round up.

This week we have published a new article and a guest post.

open.substack.com/pub/environm...

This interview relates to his recent article, co-authored with Aaron M. McCright: What explains the relationship between populist radical right attitudes and opposition to climate policy?: structural vs. ideological factors.
doi.org/10.1080/0964...

In this interview, Håkon Grøn Sælen discusses the research and findings of his recent article in Environmental Politics, co-authored with Aaron M. McCright: What explains the relationship between populist radical right attitudes and opposition to climate policy?: structural vs. ideological factors. Congratulations on your recent article! What is the key message that you hope people take from this research? Thank you! We see more and more examples of populist radical right parties and politicians opposing climate policy. Previous work has found a correlation between populist radical right attitudes and climate policy opposition also among voters. Our work highlights the importance of nativist ideology for understanding this association.

New guest post!

Climate policy opposition and the populist radical right, an interview with Håkon Grøn Sælen.

environmentalpoliticsjournal.net/interviews/c...

This interview relates to his recent article, co-authored with Aaron M. McCright: What explains the relationship between populist radical right attitudes and opposition to climate policy?: structural vs. ideological factors.
doi.org/10.1080/0964...

In this interview, Håkon Grøn Sælen discusses the research and findings of his recent article in Environmental Politics, co-authored with Aaron M. McCright: What explains the relationship between populist radical right attitudes and opposition to climate policy?: structural vs. ideological factors. Congratulations on your recent article! What is the key message that you hope people take from this research? Thank you! We see more and more examples of populist radical right parties and politicians opposing climate policy. Previous work has found a correlation between populist radical right attitudes and climate policy opposition also among voters. Our work highlights the importance of nativist ideology for understanding this association.

New guest post!

Climate policy opposition and the populist radical right, an interview with Håkon Grøn Sælen.

environmentalpoliticsjournal.net/interviews/c...

The agency of the countries hosting the BRI projects also matters as it shapes the demand side of the political equation. This develops a relational model of a partnership between an authoritarian China and the prevailing developmental pragmatism in the green BRI host countries.

ABSTRACT Beijing has responded to the environmental and transparency concerns of its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) by transforming it into a ‘green BRI’. This article examines the agency of the BRI host countries and develops a relational model of their partnership with China to explain the dynamics behind the greenwashing of the of the BRI. Such a partnership, which we term as developmental pragmatism, features utilitarian and transactional arrangements that are based on common developmental mindsets, mutual material interests, weak institutions and lack of external alternative funding. This partnership highlights an underlying problem in the international drive for decarbonisation that ignores a trade-off between economic affordability and environmental sustainability on the part of local developmentalism. These dynamics are demonstrated by examining efforts at environmental cooperation and the expansion of coal-fired power plants in Indonesia.

New article!

Partnerships of developmental pragmatism: greenwashing the BRI in Southeast Asia by Hui Feng & Stephen McCarthy.

doi.org/10.1080/0964...

The agency of the countries hosting the BRI projects also matters as it shapes the demand side of the political equation. This develops a relational model of a partnership between an authoritarian China and the prevailing developmental pragmatism in the green BRI host countries.

ABSTRACT Beijing has responded to the environmental and transparency concerns of its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) by transforming it into a ‘green BRI’. This article examines the agency of the BRI host countries and develops a relational model of their partnership with China to explain the dynamics behind the greenwashing of the of the BRI. Such a partnership, which we term as developmental pragmatism, features utilitarian and transactional arrangements that are based on common developmental mindsets, mutual material interests, weak institutions and lack of external alternative funding. This partnership highlights an underlying problem in the international drive for decarbonisation that ignores a trade-off between economic affordability and environmental sustainability on the part of local developmentalism. These dynamics are demonstrated by examining efforts at environmental cooperation and the expansion of coal-fired power plants in Indonesia.

New article!

Partnerships of developmental pragmatism: greenwashing the BRI in Southeast Asia by Hui Feng & Stephen McCarthy.

doi.org/10.1080/0964...

Week in review for Environmental Politics The Friday Post

Week in review! Subscribe to our Substack for a short weekly round up.

This week we have published a new article.
environmentalpoliticsjournal.substack.com/p/week-in-re...

Week in review for Environmental Politics The Friday Post

Week in review! Subscribe to our Substack for a short weekly round up.

This week we have published a new article.
environmentalpoliticsjournal.substack.com/p/week-in-re...

Call for expressions of interest: Environmental Politics is seeking a Social Media Editor to join its editorial team. Environmental Politics is an international, interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal spanning the fields of political science, political sociology, and political theory. The journal provides a forum for the publication of original research into, and discussion and analysis of, the diverse theoretical and empirical aspects of environmental politics. The journal’s 2024 Impact Factor is 5.9, ranking 4/322 in Political Science and 29/191 in Environmental Studies.

Expressions of interest for our Social Media Editor position will be reviewed from today. If you're planning on applying, please do so asap.

environmentalpoliticsjournal.net/editorial-an...

ABSTRACT Discourse on hypocrisy is plentiful in the climate politics of the Global North. A specific form of climate hypocrisy critique, the fossil hypocrisy charge, contends that climate activists’ demands for system change and phaseout of fossil fuels are hypocritical because their everyday living is thoroughly based on fossil fuels. The individualistic fossil hypocrisy charge, wielded by climate obstructionists, has been refuted in research. However, a fundamental kernel of truth underlying the charge, and the broader obstructionist ‘narrative of necessity’ of fossil fuels, remains unresolved: Contemporary life is constitutively entangled with fossil fuels. While avoiding individual hypocrisy, we show how researchers and climate advocates might remain subject to an adjacent problem, fossil complacency, if they disregard the kernel in their agendas of system change. By drawing from interdisciplinary energy research, we show how critique of fossil complacency helps in reorienting climate hypocrisy and system change debates to overcome obstructionist ‘climate realism’.

New article!

Fossil complacency: reorienting climate hypocrisy and system change debates, by Otto Snellman & Sakari Säynäjoki.

doi.org/10.1080/0964...

PhD scholarship opportunity, to work with @sherilynmacgregor.bsky.social and myself on the 'local politics of climate backlash' at @uompols.bsky.social and @justcentre.bsky.social. Please circulate to anyone who might be interested! www.findaphd.com/phds/project....

Climate action versus environmental protection? How far-right and environmentalist messengers shape public attitudes towards renewable energy infrastructure in forests This article examines how political messengers, and not the message, influence attitudes toward renewable energy infrastructure amid an increasingly polarized climate change debate. Focusing on win...

New publication for everyone interested in climate politics, far-right climate obstruction, and the role of elite cues! 📚

"Climate action versus environmental protection?" now out in @environmentalpol.bsky.social (with Matthias Diermeier).

www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.... (open access!) (1/5)

ABSTRACT Discourse on hypocrisy is plentiful in the climate politics of the Global North. A specific form of climate hypocrisy critique, the fossil hypocrisy charge, contends that climate activists’ demands for system change and phaseout of fossil fuels are hypocritical because their everyday living is thoroughly based on fossil fuels. The individualistic fossil hypocrisy charge, wielded by climate obstructionists, has been refuted in research. However, a fundamental kernel of truth underlying the charge, and the broader obstructionist ‘narrative of necessity’ of fossil fuels, remains unresolved: Contemporary life is constitutively entangled with fossil fuels. While avoiding individual hypocrisy, we show how researchers and climate advocates might remain subject to an adjacent problem, fossil complacency, if they disregard the kernel in their agendas of system change. By drawing from interdisciplinary energy research, we show how critique of fossil complacency helps in reorienting climate hypocrisy and system change debates to overcome obstructionist ‘climate realism’.

New article!

Fossil complacency: reorienting climate hypocrisy and system change debates, by Otto Snellman & Sakari Säynäjoki.

doi.org/10.1080/0964...

Week in review for Environmental Politics The Friday Post

Week in review! Subscribe to our Substack for a short weekly round up.

This week we have published three articles and a brief report. We also have an ongoing call for interest for a new Social Media Editor.

open.substack.com/pub/environm...

Week in review for Environmental Politics The Friday Post

Week in review! Subscribe to our Substack for a short weekly round up.

This week we have published three articles and a brief report. We also have an ongoing call for interest for a new Social Media Editor.

open.substack.com/pub/environm...

This article contributes to research on the politics of climate change by studying to what extent attitudes towards concrete climate measures, in our case the acceptance of specific forms of renewable energy infrastructure, are shaped by political messengers.

ABSTRACT This article examines how political messengers, and not the message, influence attitudes toward renewable energy infrastructure amid an increasingly polarized climate change debate. Focusing on wind power, a highly politicized issue, and solar energy, less contentious, we conducted an experimental survey in Germany. We assess how either a far-right or an environmentalist critic affect acceptance of renewables. Importantly, our analysis examines support for renewables in forest areas, focusing on a conflict between climate action and local environmental protection. Our findings reveal that the messenger impacts attitudes regarding wind energy. Criticism of wind turbine expansion by an environmentalist actor leads to greater rejection, while a similar critique by a far-right actor results in increased acceptance, i.e. a backlash effect. No such influence was found for solar energy. We explain these diverging findings by differences in politicization. Our findings have important consequences for understanding key dynamics of the public debate and political conflict over climate action.

New article!

Climate action versus environmental protection? How far-right and environmentalist messengers shape public attitudes towards renewable energy infrastructure in forests, by @manesweisskircher.bsky.social and Matthias Diermeier.

doi.org/10.1080/0964...

This article contributes to research on the politics of climate change by studying to what extent attitudes towards concrete climate measures, in our case the acceptance of specific forms of renewable energy infrastructure, are shaped by political messengers.

ABSTRACT This article examines how political messengers, and not the message, influence attitudes toward renewable energy infrastructure amid an increasingly polarized climate change debate. Focusing on wind power, a highly politicized issue, and solar energy, less contentious, we conducted an experimental survey in Germany. We assess how either a far-right or an environmentalist critic affect acceptance of renewables. Importantly, our analysis examines support for renewables in forest areas, focusing on a conflict between climate action and local environmental protection. Our findings reveal that the messenger impacts attitudes regarding wind energy. Criticism of wind turbine expansion by an environmentalist actor leads to greater rejection, while a similar critique by a far-right actor results in increased acceptance, i.e. a backlash effect. No such influence was found for solar energy. We explain these diverging findings by differences in politicization. Our findings have important consequences for understanding key dynamics of the public debate and political conflict over climate action.

New article!

Climate action versus environmental protection? How far-right and environmentalist messengers shape public attitudes towards renewable energy infrastructure in forests, by @manesweisskircher.bsky.social and Matthias Diermeier.

doi.org/10.1080/0964...

The article finds:

- Economic issues are a key element in how the far right attacks and seeks to delegitimize climate action and policies
- Four overarching narratives link climate and the economy
- They allow the far right to present itself as the "voice of reason"

ABSTRACT This article asks how two populist radical right parties, the German AfD and the Austrian FPÖ, communicate about climate on Twitter/X. Analyzing a corpus of 6,254 tweets, it pays special attention to a relatively underresearched aspect of climate communication by these actors: the way they reference the economy – in what I call ‘economic signification’ – in their discourse on climate. I distinguish four narratives promoted by them, climate policies threaten the economy as a whole; they unfairly burden specific ‘deserving’ groups; climate actors pursue hidden economic agendas; and they act on misguided assumptions and lack economic competence. By combining response and process skepticism, these narratives refract a broader vision of social order, allowing these parties to present themselves as a ‘voice of reason’ in the climate debate. Economic signification allows the far right to speak in the ‘realist’, warning mode, decrying the alleged economic ‘irrationality’ of mainstream parties.

New article!

Cassandra from the far right: how the German and Austrian populist radical right links climate skepticism with economic issues by Till Hilmar / @tillhilmar.bsky.social

doi.org/10.1080/0964...

Check out our new paper on degrowth politics. We show that diverse actors might support measures related to degrowth without supporting more fundamental transformations of society, economy or politics. If you need a copy, please contact me.

Environmental Politics is an international, interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal spanning the fields of political science, political sociology, and political theory. The journal provides a forum for the publication of original research into, and discussion and analysis of, the diverse theoretical and empirical aspects of environmental politics. The journal’s 2024 Impact Factor is 5.9, ranking 4/322 in Political Science and 29/191 in Environmental Studies. The journal is recruiting a Social Media Editor to manage its external communications. Responsibilities for this position include: Managing social media accounts (currently Bluesky, X, Substack) and the journal website Posting and circulating all journal and website publications Arranging and editing guest posts and interviews with authors We welcome expressions of interest from scholars of environmental politics from any higher education institution. We strongly encourage applications from early career individuals, including advanced PhD students and post-doctoral fellows, and we would specifically welcome applications from historically underrepresented groups and those whose intersectional identities and perspectives position them to support the editorial team’s commitment to an inclusive conception of environmental politics scholarship. The journal’s Aims and Scope, and the current membership of the editorial team and Editorial Advisory Board, are available at: tandfonline.com/fenp The Social Media Editor position comes with a modest stipend. Please send expressions of interest (no more than 2 pages), along with a brief CV, to David Konisky, Editor-in-Chief, (dkonisky@iu.edu). Reviews will begin October 15, 2025, and applications will be considered until the position is filled.

Call for expressions of interest: We are seeking a Social Media Editor to join our editorial team.

Responsibilities for this position include:

- Running social media & website
- Circulating all publications
- Arranging & editing guest posts

environmentalpoliticsjournal.net/editorial-an...

The article finds:

- Economic issues are a key element in how the far right attacks and seeks to delegitimize climate action and policies
- Four overarching narratives link climate and the economy
- They allow the far right to present itself as the "voice of reason"

ABSTRACT This article asks how two populist radical right parties, the German AfD and the Austrian FPÖ, communicate about climate on Twitter/X. Analyzing a corpus of 6,254 tweets, it pays special attention to a relatively underresearched aspect of climate communication by these actors: the way they reference the economy – in what I call ‘economic signification’ – in their discourse on climate. I distinguish four narratives promoted by them, climate policies threaten the economy as a whole; they unfairly burden specific ‘deserving’ groups; climate actors pursue hidden economic agendas; and they act on misguided assumptions and lack economic competence. By combining response and process skepticism, these narratives refract a broader vision of social order, allowing these parties to present themselves as a ‘voice of reason’ in the climate debate. Economic signification allows the far right to speak in the ‘realist’, warning mode, decrying the alleged economic ‘irrationality’ of mainstream parties.

New article!

Cassandra from the far right: how the German and Austrian populist radical right links climate skepticism with economic issues by Till Hilmar / @tillhilmar.bsky.social

doi.org/10.1080/0964...

Recent institutional innovation and political ambition in global biodiversity governance indicate transformative potential, but timely improvements in international implementation support are critical.