This research is concerned with how in/security is understood and the implications of contested meanings of in/security. The basic premise of this thesis is that in/security in itself has no meaning and thus cannot exist in isolation. Instead, in/security is always defined in relation to something or someone. How we understand in/security derives from the contexts we navigate and the identities we construct. An inquiry into in/security therefore demands incorporating a multiplicity of narratives and discussing these in relation to each other. While scholars have called for a greater emphasis on exploring in/security in marginal sites, I argue that accounts from the margins must not be at the exclusion of other more dominant narratives. Such analysis – placing the elite/margin, included/excluded, powerful/weak – in the same framework in order to produce a relational account of in/security is largely missing. This thesis sets out to provide a rich and detailed understanding of the everyday complexities of in/security. I propose a framework for capturing relational and contextual dimensions of in/security, and the implication of contested meanings of in/security understandings. Through an in-depth case study in the context of the transitions towards a post-conflict period in Colombia, following five decades of armed conflict, I inquired into in/security understandings at the margins in relation to the centre. The margins were represented by conflict-affected communities whereas the centre was represented by the Colombian government and key security sector institutions. The research found several relational dimensions of in/security understandings between the state- and the marginalized community-levels. Moreover, contextual and identity factors had a significant impact on how in/security was spoken about and what was spoken of. Through the framework, it was possible to see in continuum the way deeply ingrained understandings of in/security reproduce violence as the government seeks to transition the country into a post-conflict period following five decades of armed conflict. The research, through a detailed empirical case study, supports the view that in/security is relational and derivative of context and with ties to identity. It contributes to further our understandings of in/security at three distinct levels. At the theoretical level, the research builds upon existing literature in the field of security studies to advance an enhanced understanding of the relational and contextual dimensions of in/security, the contested meanings of in/security and the implications thereof. Methodologically, it proposes an alternative framework to capture the relational dimensions through shifting the problem formulation from a traditional focus on who is to be secured from what threats to how in/security is understood by different people/communities in different contexts. Empirically, it contributes to an off-centred understanding of in/security dynamics in the official transitions into the post-conflict period in Colombia. Through its empirical evidence it has the potential to offer an important contribution to the analysis of post-conflict transitions more generally.

Cette thèse est basée sur trois essais distincts mais interconnectés qui soulignent le rôle important du discours, la légitimité et le pouvoir dans le changement institutionnel vers un développement durable. Dans deux chapitres de ma thèse, j'explore les dynamiques de (de)légitimation du gaz de schiste, en France et en Allemagne. L'exploitation du gaz de schiste par la fracturation hydraulique a déclenché une forte contestation dans ces pays en raison de ses implications socio-économiques, environnementaux et politiques. Le premier essai est une étude de cas comparative des débats publiques sur le de gaz de schiste, qui démontre le rôle important des institutions pour le succès des cadrages mobilisés. Le deuxième essai est une étude de cas portant sur la (de)légitimation des acteurs impliqués dans le débat sur le gaz de schiste français qui propose qu'il y ait une différence fondamentale dans légitimant un problème et légitimant un acteur. Le troisième essai théorique introduit le concept de parentalisme afin de mettre en évidence comment les acteurs contrôlent qui peut participer aux débats. En tout, cette thèse met en lumière comment les débats sur des enjeux sociaux et environnementaux sont influencés par des stratégies discursives en résonance avec le contexte institutionnel et l’identité des acteurs ainsi que par des stratégies de contrôle discursives et non discursives sur qui participe et comment dans la délibération. / This dissertation is based on three separate but interconnected essays which underscore the important roles of discourse, legitimacy and power in fueling or hindering institutional change towards sustainability. In two chapters of my thesis I explore the discursive legitimation dynamics in the contested issue field around shale gas, in France and Germany. The exploitation of shale gas via the hydraulic fracturing (or fracking) technique triggered strong contestation in these countries due to its socio-economic, environmental, and political implications which challenge the energy sector on a global scale. The first essay is a comparative case study of the public shale gas debates which surfaces the important role of institutions in influencing the success of certain arguments over others. The second essay is a single case study focusing on the (de)legitimation of the actors involved in the French shale gas debate which proposes that there is a fundamental difference in legitimating an issue and legitimating an actor. The third theoretical essay introduces the concept of parentalism in order to highlight how actors control who may participate in discursive struggles. On a whole this thesis surfaces how ongoing struggles in contested environmental and social issue fields are shaped by the fit of discursive strategies with the institutional context and contestants’ legitimate identities as well as by actors’ discursive and non-discursive controlling strategies of who participates and how in deliberation.

Commercial fisheries in the Florida Keys have experienced a significant decline in participation and harvest over the past two decades, with over half of the fishers exiting the fishery since 1990 and a 50-70% decline in annual landings compared to previous decades. The conventional narrative of fisheries management identifies overfishing and overcapacity as the malaise endemic to open-access fisheries systems, for which the remedy offered is technocratic management. Technocratic management, which seeks to restore ecological integrity and economic efficiency, has been increasingly employed in the Florida Keys, in the form of limited access and property rights measures. I contend that the technocratic management approach is flawed and in a large part responsible for the decline of Florida Keys fisheries because the approach has ignored social sustainability, leading to a significant reduction in fisher participation, the fragmentation of fishing communities, and erosion of social capital. Technocratic management has also underestimated the importance of non-fishery factors, unique to place, and these factors – including population, tourism, and globalization factors – have exacerbated the impacts of management measures. The net result has been the opening up of scarce and valuable coastal space, which was previously occupied by fishers, fish houses and processors, and other fisheries infrastructure, to conversion for non-working waterfront uses. While measures have been undertaken to foster fisher participation and slow down waterfront conversion, these have largely failed due to the measures’ inability to address the core problem, which is the flawed management approach that undermines social sustainability. I provide a revised, comprehensive fisheries management framework that, if implemented, can at least address some of the technocratic management’s shortcomings and prevent further decline in fisher participation and fisheries decline.

The way humans currently interact with the atmosphere and oceans around us is unsustainable, with pollution entering our waters faster than we are collecting it, and the sea level rising faster than we are building coastal barriers to protect our current infrastructure. This thesis explores the common methodology for communicating climate change and its future effects, and highlights an opportunity for using infrastructure to facilitate interaction with the urban-aquatic interface. By promoting experiential contact with the natural spaces that are most at risk to climate change’s impacts, a sense of stewardship for those spaces will spur behavioral change and activism. On a local level, this thesis explores the history of public access to San Onofre State Beach, and the possibility for the restriction of that access in 2021. Using a 3D topographic and bathymetric model of San Onofre State Beach, I attempt to highlight the beauty of the undeveloped California coastline, and the benefits of keeping this 6.5-mile coastline within the State Parks system.

More democratic planning processes are acknowledged to facilitate several positive outcomes including acceptance, support, better solutions and ownership, which are even more critical in developing countries where resource limitation is debilitating. But the paradox lies in needing to institute more democratic planning processes inside less democratic systems. In seeking explanations as to why collaboration in planning is lacking in urban Ethiopia, the research adopts a different analytical perspective that conceptualizes the state not only as a direct participant through its different agencies but also as the main architect of social structure. As the state in less democratic systems is stronger in shaping society, the contextualization of sense-making in the wider environment of the South requires focusing on the influence of government systems to discover associations and patterns that determine the structure of planning processes. Adopting flexible and pragmatic methodological procedures, methods and techniques that balance what is possible with epistemological interest, the research introduces a different lens to planning that links trust, collective action and cooperation with confidence in government by taking into consideration the embeddedness of actors within the framework of existing realities. Through the case of Amdework, the thesis presents implications on planning by the different attributes of the state and state-society relations. It shows how and to what extent partial and undemocratic government systems create power asymmetry, impede the development and the integrity of organized civil society, affect social capital such as trust, cooperative norms and the motivation to participate in collective action. These in turn penetrate planning processes by destroying the basic level of trust, balanced power of participants and democratic culture, and the we-intention for joint action. And through five more cases that focus on conceptions and cooperation at the micro-level (in the autonomous community of Awra Amba, the foreign NGO spearheaded joint action of the BuraNest initiative, and different projects in or related with Addis Ababa), it provides empirical evidence that planning, whether government entities are direct participants or not, also heed to pressures exerted by the overall of intuitional/political environment where the state rules rather than governs. / Doctorat en Art de bâtir et urbanisme (Architecture) / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

No description available.

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between state and civil society. The last decades there has been major changes across state, market and civil society. During these changes, civil society has become an important part of the welfare service. In this study an idea-driven public partnership (IOP) in Malmö is examine. My theoretical starting point is Gramsci’s concept of hegemony, integral state, consent-coercion and Jonathan Davies concept of creeping managerialism. Using interviews and document studies I am able to deepen the understanding of state-civil society relationships. The result of the analysis shows that the case study is an example of when civil society is compliant to the hegemonic order. This can be understood on the basis that civil society is also part of the hegemonic order. The strong actors in civil society, together with the state and capital, are all part of the historical bloc that governs society. Lastly, the study indicates managerialism in the partnership.

Extreme heat events are the deadliest natural hazard in the United States and will continue to get worse in the coming years due to the effects of climate change. As a result, more people will experience deadly heat conditions. This highlights the need for decision-makers to develop better strategies for preventing future losses. How badly individuals are affected by extreme heat depends on many circumstances, such as how high temperatures actually are, weather conditions, and location. For example, a dry 90 °F day in Phoenix is probably more tolerable than a humid 90 °F day in New Orleans for most individuals. However, some groups of people are more likely to be harmed by extreme heat than others, such as the elderly and those who work outdoors. This may seem straightforward, but uncovering less obvious clues that help explain how and why some groups are affected differently by extreme heat can be difficult, since much of the impact of extreme heat depends on people’s judgements of the risk and their personal decisions. These human factors are typically not very easy to measure because different hazards affect different people indifferent ways at different times in different places. This study uses a large survey of the U.S. population and statistical methods to explore how weather, time, space, and personal experience with heat affect different people’s judgment of risk. Whether different groups understand their high or low risk status has important implications for decision-makers responsible for crafting plans to reduce extreme heat risk in their local community.

As knowledge about the constellating set of environmental and social crises stemming from the neoliberal global food regime becomes more pressing and popularized among US consumers, it has brought Indigenous actors asserting their political sovereignty and treaty rights with regards to their homelands into new collaborations, contestations, and negotiations with settlers in emerging food politics domains. In this dissertation, I examine solidarities and affinities being forged between Coast Salish and settler food actors in Puget Sound, attending specifically to how contested sovereignties are submerged but at play in these relations and how settler desires for belonging on and to stolen Indigenous lands animate liberal and radical food system politics. The dissertation presents my ethnographic fieldwork in South Puget Sound over a period of 18 months with two related Coast Salish food sovereignty projects that brought Indigenous and settler food actors into weedy collaborations. One was a curriculum development project for Native and regional youth focused on the revitalization of Coast Salish plant landscapes, knowledge, pedagogies, and systems of reciprocity. The other was a campaign to counter the introduction of genetically engineered salmon into US food markets and coastal production facilities across the Western Hemisphere, which I situate within longstanding salmon-centered social and political struggles in Coast Salish territories in the context of Indigenous/settler-state relations. Throughout these engagements, I identified how multicultural, anti-racist, and anti-capitalist food movement frameworks share in common with neoliberal nature privatization schemes modes of disavowing the geopolitics of Indigenous sovereignty within the US settler state. The research reveals patterns in how Coast Salish food actors push back against the ways settler food actors are plugged into settler colonial governmentality. These insights, in turn, helped to make legible how inherited liberal mythologies of the nation-state and legal orders rooted in the doctrine of terra nulliuslimit the stakes of food system work in terms of inclusion and equality, and miss their collusion with structures that unmake the human-land relationships that Coast Salish people define as existential and (geo)political. In my analysis, I engage Indigenous critiques of settler colonialism to complicate Marxian, Deleuzian, and Foucauldian analyses of North American alternative food politics, while doubling back to consider the ways the disavowal of ongoing Indigenous dispossession functions across these literatures and the social practices they influence, ultimately to consider how food-centered scholarship, environmentalism, and politics in North America stand to be transformed by what I argue is a Coast Salish ‘politics of refusal’. This project is unique in attending to how settler colonial theory, Indigenous critical theory, and Indigenous politics in North America enrich and complicate the literatures provincializing the Nature-Culture divide, as well as a largely Marxian and antiracist critical food studies literature. It contributes to settler colonial studies as a project of redefinition for the study of US politics and society while specifically bringing that interdisciplinary project into the ambit of North American critical food studies scholarship.

<p>The Community Intervention Trial for Smoking Cessation (COMMIT) was the largest community-based effort to date aimed specifically at the reduction of smoking. COMMIT involved 11 matched pairs of intervention and comparison communities from geographically diverse regions of North America. One community from each of the matched pairs was randomly allocated to receive a standardized intervention protocol implemented between 1989 and 1993. The main trial goal was to achieve higher quit rates amongst heavy smokers in the intervention communities compared to the comparison communities.</p> <p>Intermediate trial goals were to increase the priority of smoking as a public health problem and increase social norms that support nonsmoking in the intervention communities. These goals were informed by contemporary health promotion theory which suggests that longstanding changes in behaviour are best achieved by altering social environments to support healthy choices. This thesis presents a conceptualization of the links between attributes of individuals, communities and attitudes toward smoking which provides the basis for empirical investigations of COMMIT's success in promoting attitude change; the nature of the relationship between attitude and behaviour change for smoking; and the role of community context in constructing attitudes.</p> <p>Intermediate trial goals were to increase the priority of smoking as a public health problem and increase social norms that support nonsmoking in the intervention communities. These goals were informed by contemporary health promotion theory which suggests that longstanding changes in behaviour are best achieved by altering social environments to support healthy choices. This thesis presents a conceptualization of the links between attributes of individuals, communities and attitudes toward smoking which provides the basis for empirical investigations of COMMIT's success in promoting attitude change; the nature of the relationship between attitude and behaviour change for smoking; and the role of community context in constructing attitudes.</p> <p>Attitude change was assessed primarily from prevalence surveys administered in 1989 (n=9,875) and 1993 (n=14,117). Data from cohorts of smokers and nonsmokers (n=5,450) were also used to examine covariates of attitude change and for the analysis of the attitude change -behaviour change relationship. Community profile data and legislative tracking were employed in the descriptive analyses of the relationship between community context and smoking attitudes.</p> <p>Valid and reliable measures representing the primary constructs ofbeliefin the priority of smoking as a public health problem and norms and values concerning smoking were developed. Attitude change, assessed by a cross-sectional approach, revealed that there were substantial changes in favour of stronger anti-smoking attitudes in both the intervention and comparison communities. Intervention effects were limited to changes in heavy smokers' beliefs about the seriousness of smoking as a public health problem. The strongest covariate of attitude change was shown to be quitting smoking during the trial for both measures, while changes in beliefs about smoking as a public health problem were demonstrated to be greater for less educated groups in the intervention communities. The attitude change -behaviour change analyses revealed support for traditional theoretical positions in the debate. Conclusions reached, however, suggest that the type of behaviour change being measured (i.e., quitting or starting smoking) and the measure of attitude affect the results of attitude behaviour analyses. Lastly, 'place' was shown have an important independent effect on attitudes toward smoking. Through case studies of several COMMIT communities, place attributes identified to have an important impact on individual smoking attitudes were economic reliance on the tobacco industry, socio-economic and cultural composition and legislative/political climates.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)