Search

This paper innovatively extends existing practice-theoretical mobility research by examining biographical aspects of people’s everyday mobility that capture and reflect their social relations. Drawing on nine qualitative interviews with couples who live in/near Vienna without a private car, the paper demonstrates the promising potential of retrospective forms of social research for uncovering the dynamics of mobility practices across the life course. It conceptualises individuals as inherently social and mutually interconnected mobility practitioners whose complex and dynamic interactions with others make up more or less mobile households and families. The paper thus treats social relations as a major connector between the constitutive social and material elements of (mobility) practices, making an explicitly relational contribution to current practice-theoretical debates in mobility research.

The mainstreaming of climate change through processes of media communication and political advocacy carries with it an imagined public. Drawing on qualitative data from 11 focus groups and 19 life history interviews carried out in the Republic of Ireland1 in 2010, the paper reveals a significant mismatch between the perceived characteristics of this imagined audience, and the practices and experiences of a socially embedded Irish public. Moreover, we observe the emergence of restrictive forms of discourse around climate change that leave little room for connecting with the topic, thereby serving to delegitimise it as a matter of public interest. Given the necessity for climate action and decarbonisation efforts that reach across diverse social and cultural arenas, we see potential for a broadening of public debate in line with key principles of deliberative democracy, with a view to achieving a more open and inclusive politics of climate change. Although we recognise the limitations of mainstream ...

Karin Bradley Department of Water and Environmental Studies, Linkoping University,Linkoping, SE-581 83 Sweden (email: karin.bradley@liu.se)Understanding the Environment and Social Policy deals with the intersection of environmental policy and social policy. Though often treated as two different fields with different sets of literature, in practice, they are deeply intertwined. The book is primarily written from the perspective of how environmental challenges alter the field of social policy, but it also considers to some extent how environmental policy can be more attentive to the dimensions of social sustainability. The volume develops a thorough ecosocial perspective of ethics, policy, and planning. Its explicit aim is to help advance the emerging field of ecosocial policy making. The volume is part of a series of books oriented to students on the overall theme of "understanding welfare." Despite a somewhat unappealing title, this book is an important work, not only for students, but also for politicians and practitioners.The book is an edited volume consisting of chapters on environmental challenges and policy, social challenges and policy, environmental ethics, environmental justice, health, urban planning, green jobs, citizenship, and international development. Tony Fitzpatrick, the editor of the book and author of three of its chapters, sets the overall tone. It is primarily his contributions--using illustrative examples and writing in a transparent, humorous and sometimes unexpected way--that engage the reader.Fitzpatrick is clear about the book's political positioning, a stance that is often absent from course literature that maintains an assumption of neutrality. He situates the work in the center-left and the mid-green shades of politics. At the same time, the contributors are careful to avoid being interpreted as alarmists or "unrealistic" ecologists. Rather they seek to position themselves as sound academics--well informed about global, social and environmental challenges and the necessities for action. The analyses, questions, and perspectives raised in the book move beyond the well-known consensus politics and the tired policies of mainstream society, and hence attempt to rethink current models and measurements of development and growth. In this respect, the authors bring up deep-rooted problems of Western civilization, such as the linear notion of progress and Cartesian philosophy, as they simultaneously engage with current everyday politics and geopolitical reality.What was lacking, however, was a more nuanced discussion about politics and the political--a more penetrating discussion about liberal democracy, current forms of political arrangements, and their capability (or lack thereof) to deal with environmental concerns. In Chapter Four, Philip Catney & Timothy Doyle briefly mention such theorists as Robyn Eckersley (2004) who argues that environmental responsibility and a "truly green state cannot be achieved within the frameworks of liberal democracy," and that "new forms of democracy" need to be developed. However, this chapter does not explore these new forms. This is a key question if one wants to advance ecosocial perspectives. How might current systems of democracy and governance be altered to better encompass environmental concerns, collective identities, care for the commons, as well as distant environments and distant people? It would have been fruitful to expand this discussion and engage with current debates around the post-political condition (Swyngedouw, 2007), that argues for going beyond contemporary consensus-seeking governance models and explores meanings of "the political," agonism, and radical pluralist democracy (both within and beyond the state) (see Mouffe, 2005).Catney & Doyle believe in state governance; however, they admit that until now no state can be said to have effectively handled environmental concerns (i.e., there are no "green states"). …