The Editors's Latest Posts
Ethical questions of fairness, responsibility, and burden-sharing have always been central to the international politics of climate change and efforts to construct an effective intergovernmental response to this problem.
During the past decade there has been a resurgence of interest in the concept of recognition in international theory. Once the narrow concern of social theorists, the concept of recognition is nowadays invoked in at least three different senses in order to explain three different things.
In 2015 the world’s first self-defined feminist government was formed in Sweden. As part of that ambitious declaration, Sweden also became the first state ever to publicly adopt a feminist foreign policy, with a stated ambition to become the “strongest voice for gender equality and full employment of human rights for all women and girls.”
Realpolitik is back—or if not back, at least enjoying a day in the sun more fully than it has for several decades. Chastened by the “return” of history in the new millennium, politicians, policymakers, and commentators now routinely acknowledge the value of a little more realpolitik in foreign affairs.
By 2009 the reckless greed of subprime mortgage lenders in the United States had become clear. Housing prices had collapsed by 30 percent or more, and families, unable to keep up with their ballooning mortgage payments, were being forced from their homes.
The third issue in EIA’s 30th anniversary volume includes essays by Nicholas Chan on the bottom-up architecture of the Paris climate change agreement, Jens Bartelson on the history of recognition, and Karin Aggestam and Annika Bergman-Rosamond on Swedish feminist foreign policy; features by Luke Glanville on self-interest and the distant vulnerable, and by Silje Aambø Langvatn on the use of public reason in international courts; a review essay by James K. Galbraith on ethics and inequality; a response by Ryan Jenkins and Duncan Purves to Robert Sparrow’s article on autonomous weapon systems (EIA 30.1), with a rejoinder by Robert Sparrow; and book reviews by Michael C. Williams and Jonathan Morduch.
Climate change is urgent, and it commands a moral dimension. The dry, strategic terminology about competition, conflict and instability shrouds a terrible toll of simple human suffering. At the top of the economic pile, upper-income societies will likely pay a greater share of their wealth for food; marginal societies will go without.