Skip to main content

Across Species and Borders: Political Representation, Ecological Democracy and the Non-Human

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Non-Human Nature in World Politics

Part of the book series: Frontiers in International Relations ((FIR))

Abstract

Debates about democracy and ecology invariably lead to the question of the representation and membership of non-human animals, ecosystems and the biosphere in world politics. This chapter responds by interweaving two lines of inquiry. One considers the fundamental political theory that could generate an adequate account of how to give representation to the non-human in the polity. Key theoretical interventions will be considered alongside a posthumanist, new materialist account of the material agency of ecosystems. The second considers the dilemmas involved in designing ecological democratic institutions that could include the non-human in communicative systems of membership and accountability. We propose two new enabling structures for ecological inclusion and governance: 15 regional ecosystem assemblies to cover the Earth’s major biomes, and an Earth System Council to coordinate integrated action, both of which include and channel representation from states, indigenous communities, and proxy guardians for the non-human. Such institutions require a deep commitment to the complexity and vitality of the biosphere, reflexivity and humility in proposing Earth system repair, and a constant awareness of the aporetic quality of political representation as such, in support of new forms of interspecies politics and governance that might work for and with the biosphere as a whole.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aristotle (2013). Politics. In Carnes Lord (Ed.) Aristotle’s politics. 2nd Edition. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle (1883). History of animals in ten books, trans. Richard Creswell. London: George Bell and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atapattu, S. (2015). The significance of international environmental law principles in reinforcing or dismantling the North-South Divide. In Alam Shawkat, Sumudu Atapattu, Carmen G. Gonzalez, and Jona Razzaque (Eds.) International Environmental Law and the Global South(pp. 74–108). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basnett, C. J. (2016). Other political animals: aristotle and the limits of political community. The European Legacy,21(3), 290–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biermann, F. (2014). Earth system governance: World politics in the Anthropocene. Cambridge Mass. and London: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, A. (2019). Blue screen biosphere: The absent presence of biodiversity in international law. International Political Sociology,13(3), 333–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, A., & Fishel, S. (2019). Power, world politics and thing-systems in the anthropocene. In F. Biermann & E. Lovbrand (Eds.), Anthropocene encounters: New directions in green political thinking(pp. 87–108). Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bull, H. (1977). The anarchical society: A study of order in world politics. Basingstroke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, H., & Will Kymlicka, W. (2011). Zoopolis: A political theory of animal rights. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driessen, C. (2014). Animal Deliberation. In M. Wissenberg & D. Schlosberg (Eds.), Political animals and animal politics(pp. 90–104). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dayan, C. (2013). The law is a white dog: How legal rituals make and unmake persons. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Fontenay, É. (2012). Without offending humans: A critique of animal rights. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. S. (1995). Political and ecological communication. Environmental Politics,4(4), 13–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. S., & Pickering, J. (2019). Politics in the anthropocene. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. S., & Stevenson, H. (2014). Democratising global climate governance. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckersley, R. (2004). The green state. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Eckersley, R. (1992). Environmentalism and political Theory. New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falkner, R. (2017). The anarchical society and climate change. In M. Carr, H. Suganami, & A. Humphreys (Eds.), The anarchical society at 40: Contemporary challenges and prospects (pp. 198–215). Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishel, S. (2017). The microbial state: Global thriving and the body politic. Minneapolis and London: Minnesota University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Garver, E. (2011). Aristotle’s politics: Living well and living together. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (2003). The future of human nature. Cambridge and Malden M.A: Polity Press. Kindle Edition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbes, T. (1997). Leviathan, Richard E. Flathman and David Johnston (Eds.). New York and London: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobe, S. (2015). Evolution of the principle on permanent sovereignty over natural resources: From soft law to a customary law principle? In M. Bungenberg & S. Hobe (Eds.), Permanent sovereignty over natural resources (pp. 1–13). Heidelberg, New York and London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, I. (1978). Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohn, E. (2013). How forests think: Towards an anthropology beyond the human. Berkeley and London: University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (2005). From realpolitik to dingpolitik—an introduction to making things public. In B. Latour & P. Weibel (Eds.), Making things public-atmospheres of democracy(pp. 515–539). Boston: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (2017). Facing Gaia: Eight lectures on the new climatic regime, trans. Catherine Porter. Cambridge and Malden MA: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovelock, J. (2000). Gaia: A new look at life on earth. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manning, E. (2007). Politics of touch: Sense, movement, sovereignty. Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margulis, L. (1998). Symbiotic planet. Amherst: Perseus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massumi, B. (2014). What animals teach us about politics. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Merchant, C. (1983). The death of nature: Women, ecology and the scientific revolution. New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson, S., & Jinnah, S. (Eds.). (2016). New earth politics. Cambridge Mass: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. (2006). Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge MA. and London: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. (2011). Creating capabilities: The human development approach. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paganini, G. (2017). “Political animals in seventeenth century philosophy” in Stefanie Buchenau, Roberto Lo Presti (Eds.), Human and Animal Cognition in Early Modern Philosophy and Medicine (pp. 186–200). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plumwood, V. (2002). Environmental culture: The ecological crisis of reason. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, R. (1999). The law of peoples. Cambridge Mass. and London: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlosberg, D. (2014). Ecological Justice for the Anthropocene. In M. Wissenberg & D. Schlosberg (Eds.), Political animals and animal politics(pp. 75–89). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, H. (2012). Institutionalizing unsustainability: The paradox of global climate governance. Berkeley and London: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNGA (1962). General Assembly resolution 1803 (XVII) of 14 December 1962, “Permanent sovereignty over natural resources”.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voigt, C. (Ed.) (2013). Rule of law for nature: New dimensions and ideas in environmental law. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefanie Fishel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Burke, A., Fishel, S. (2020). Across Species and Borders: Political Representation, Ecological Democracy and the Non-Human . In: Pereira, J., Saramago, A. (eds) Non-Human Nature in World Politics. Frontiers in International Relations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49496-4_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics