Climate Change at Play Negotiating as a Positive Freedom David O Kronlid Docent of Ethics, the Faculty of Theology, UU Senior Lecturer in Curriculum studies,

Climate Change at Play

Negotiating as a Positive Freedom

David O Kronlid

Docent of Ethics, the Faculty of Theology, UUSenior Lecturer in Curriculum studies, Dept. of Education, UU

Purpose

•Explore the relevance of ludology for climate change negotiaiton discourse

Playing the game?

• Barcelona Climate Change Conference 2009

• African Nations walk out Barcelona

• Sudanese H.E Ambassador Di-Aping CoP15

Three main Q:s•(1) can climate change negotiations and

negotiators reasonable be thought of as if negotiations are a game and the negotiators players?

•(2) If so, what kind of games are negotiations, who are the players, what does fair play mean, what does foul play and being a spoil-sport mean?

•(3) If so, what is the relevance for climate change justice, capabilities research and climate change negotiators of fleshing out the ability to play as a functioning in a climate change negotiation context?

It is a Game!?

•Game Theory

•Negotiation Analysis

•Publik discourse

Why Ludology?•Game theory & utilitarian reasoning

•Ludology includes more than rational deliberation of predicted equilibrium outcomes

•ludology deals with and defines play in coherence with play as capability – being able to laugh and enjoy recreational activities – in the capabilities literature (e.g. Alkire & Black 1997; Nussbaum, 2003).

Capabilites research. Content

and procedure.David O. Kronlid, PhD week, Environmental Learning and Research

Centre, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, SA, Oct 19, 2011.

4. International book (2011-)

Case studies in Mongolia (2010-11), Zimbabwe (2007/2010-), Nepal (2011-)

5. SwedishSouthAfricanClimateChangeCapabilitiesEmpathyTheaterProject

XFiveOneX TwoX

(2008-2010...)

(2008-)

X11....):

The s c o p e, s h a p e and c u r r e n c y of social and

distributive climate change justice

•…the entities that we identify as the legitimate recipients of benefits and burdens in ”society”

S c o p e of social justice

??

?

??

pattern of benefits that a theory of distribution recommends.

Pluralistic = distribution according to efficiency, equality, priority, and sufficiency

S h a p e of social justice?

the aspect of well-being, or unit of benefits or advantage, on which our distributive concerns should focus:

Welfare, resources or capabilities:

Our concerns here will certainly be different from either the recoursist or the welfarist. It will not be the aim of distributive justice to secure a resource base for future generations which is equal to that enjoyed by previous generations, or a non-diminishing social welfare function, but rather to preserve an environment that enables future persons to retain the same substantive freedoms to be healthy, well fed, and well clothed that their ancestors possessed.

C u r r e n c y of social justice

?

•Climate change should not exacerbate a person’s opportunities to enjoy an equivalent array, or set, of capabilities to achieve valuable functionings, both simple and complex freedoms to be healthy, well fed, and well clothed!

N o r m a t i v e approach

??

?

??

Descriptive and comparative critical analysis of whether and how climate change affects a person’s opportunities to enjoy an equivalent array, or set, of capabilities to achieve valuable functionings.

M e t h o d o l o g i c a l approach

The C a p a b i l i t i e s approach

play

4. Conversion Factors3. Resources

1. Capability2.

Functioning

friendship

mobility

Learning

Healthtransgress

1. Different levels of

generality

2. Sensitivity to Context

3. Explicit formulation

4. Methodological

Justification

5. Exhaustion and non-

reduction

6. Reflexive methodology

•Draw up the set list of capabilities in two stages.

•first, as a generic list that is “unconstrained by limitations” of particular circumstances and second, as a pragmatic list which takes a particular context into account (Robeyns 2003:70- 72).

D i f f e r e n t levels of generality

List of ”generic” capabilities – (Alkire & Black, 1997; Robeyns, 2003; Nussbaum 2000; Kronlid 2008b)

1. Life – its maintenance and transition – being healthy and safe. 2. Knowledge and appreciation of beauty - Being rational and their capacity to “know reality and appreciate beauty”.3. Work and play - Some degree of excellence in work and play. Being “simultaneously rational and animal” and to “transform the natural world by using realities, beginning with their own bodily selves, to express meanings and serve purposes”.4. Friendship - Coherence between and among individuals and groups of persons – living at peace with others, neighbourliness, friendship.5. Self-integration - Coherence between the different dimensions of the person, i.e. “inner peace”.6. Coherent self-determination - Practical Reasonableness, coherence among ones Judgements, choices and performances – peace of conscience.7. Transcendence - Religion, spirituality – being abe to relate to more-than-human-sources of meaning and value8. Other species - Being able to relate to nonhuman animals, plants, and the world of nature9. Mobility - Being mobile in existential, social and geographical space.

Formal qualities of play (Caillois 2001)

• Free: in which playing is not obligatory; if it were, it would at once loose its attractive and joyous quality as diversion;

• Separate: circumscribed within limits of space and time, defined and fixed in advance;

• Uncertain: the course of which cannot be determined, nor the result attained beforehand, and some latitude for innovations being left to the player ’s initiative;

• Unproductive: creating neither goods, nor wealth, nor new elements of any kind; and, except for the exchange of property among the players, ending in a situation identical to that prevailing at the beginning of the game;

• Governed by rules: under conventions that suspend ordinary laws, and for the moment establish new legislations, which alone counts;

• Make-believe: accompanied by a special awareness of a second reality or of a free unreality, as against real life (Caillois, 2001, p 9-10).

•(1) can climate change negotiations and negotiators reasonable be thought of as if

negotiations are a game and the negotiators players?

•Yes!

Four Fundamental Categories of

GamesAgon

(competitionAlea

(change)Mimicry

(simulation)Ilix

(vertigo)

PAIDIA

Tumult, Agitation,,

Immoderate laughter

Not regulated racing;

Wrestling etc.; Athletics

Counting out rhymes;

Heads or tails

Children´s imitations; Games

of illusion; Tag arms; Disguises

Children ”whirling”, Horseback

riding; Swingin g, Walzing

Boxing; Billiards, Fencing;

Checkers; Fotboll; Chess

Betting; Roulette

Volador; Travelling

carnivals; Skiing; Mountain climbing; Toghtrope

walking

Theatre; Spectakels in

general

Kite flying, Solitaire,, Patience,

Crossword, Puzzles

Sports in general

Simple, complex and continuing lotteries

LUDUS

Conti

nuu

m

A rule-bounded-improvising continuum

•The first column refers to that games are played in a continuum of turbulence (paidia) and order (ludus).

•Paidia is characterized by free improvisation and diversity whilst ludus refers to games that are disciplined by implicit and explicit conventions, principles and rules (Caillois, 2001:13).

Agon

•… always a question of a rivalry which hinges on a single quality (speed, endurance, strength, memory, skill, ingenuity, etc.),

•Exercised, within defined limits and without outside assistance, in such a way that the winner appears to be better than the loser (Caillois, 2001, p 14).

Alea

•“all games that are based on a decision independent of the player, an outcome over which he has no control, and in which winning is the result of fate rather than triumphing over an adversary” (Caillois, 2001, p 17).

Alea Cont.•The alea-player is passive and awaits the

potential victory unlike the agonistic player who acts out his/her skills to perfection.

•This indicates that the agonistic player has retrospective, current and prospective responsibility for the outcome of playing whereas the alea-players simply “surrender to destiny” (Caillois, 2001, p 18).

Mimicry•Games of mimicry is dominated by an

orientation towards “being or passing for another” however not in a deceptive manner. The players are taking account of an incessant mimetic phenomena or invention – the intrinsic function of simultaneously disguising one’s conventional self and liberating nonconventional and perhaps more “authentic” dimensions of one’s self (Caillois, 2001, p 21).

Mimicry cont.

•Mimicry hence involves imagination, interpretation and illusion and Caillois focusses on how spectator games (e.g. theater, drama) are illusory for the spectators. This is an important aspect of mimicry. The illusion is however also as significant for the players themselves as it is for the spectators.

Mimicry cont.

•Having access to spectators is not a necessary condition for mimicry, both players and spectators are “for a given time … asked to believe in [décor, mask, or artifice] as more real than reality itself” (Caillois, 2001, p 23).

Ilinx•Based on the pursuit of vertigo and which

consist of an attempt to momentarily destroy the stability of perception.

• Inflict a kind of voluptuous panic upon an otherwise lucid mind.

• In all cases, it is a question of surrendering to a kind of spasm, seizure, or shock which destroys reality with sovereign brusqueness” (Caillois, 2001, p 23).

Ilinx cont.•A controlled disorder and panic, the

players of ilinx separate themselves from reality in e.g. the spinning of the Muslim dervishes or the Mexican voladores who throw themselves from masts up to hundred feet high whilst performing up to thirty complex turns until the rope attached to their waists comes to its end.

Ilinx Cont.

•In folk music festivals in Sweden couples engaged in the dance polska sometimes experience the sense of freedom and separation from the surrounding world associated with ilinx.

•(2) If so, what kind of games are negotiations, who are the players, what does

fair play mean, what does foul play and being a spoil-sport mean? Relate to case.

•??????????

• (3) If so, what is the relevance for climate change justice, capabilities research and climate change negotiators of fleshing out the ability to play as a functioning in a climate change negotiation context? Relate to case.

•??????????