Development and Territorial Restructuring in an Era of Global Change E-Book
130,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Fachliteratur
- Sprache: Englisch
Thinking about development and the environment simultaneously is one of the biggest scientific and societal challenges of the 21st century. Understanding the interactions between biophysical systems and human activities in an era of global change requires overcoming disciplinary divides and opening up new epistemological perspectives. This book explores these challenges using a territorial lens. Combining various scales of analyses (from global to local) and contexts (both urban and rural) in the North and in the South, it analyzes the relationships between environment and development through a variety of geographical objects (i.e. cities, rural and agricultural areas, coastlines, watershed), themes (i.e. ecological transitions, food, energy, transport, agriculture, mining activities) and methodologies (i.e. qualitative and quantitative approaches, modeling, in situ measurements). By engaging in a dialogue between social science and natural science disciplines, within different fields and with a variety of forms of knowledge production, this book provides essential information for understanding and reading the complexity of a globalized world. This book is targeted at academics and students in social sciences and at stakeholders in the field of territorial and environmental management.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 607
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2023
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Title Page
Copyright Page
Acknowledgments
Introduction
References
Part 1: How to Rethink Frames of Reference
1 The Food Transition, a Unique Model?
1.1. Introduction
1.2. The food transition to the test of temporalities and territories
1.3. The confrontation of a linear model to the diversity of public food policies
1.4. Conclusion
1.5. References
2 Development and Urban Environment Through the Prism of Risk and Crises
2.1. Introduction
2.2. Crisis and development: a paradigm shift
2.3. Converting disorder into a problem and uncertainty into a risk
2.4. Distant crisis, present-day risk
2.5. Representation of the origins of the crisis: globalization of local power relations
2.6. Conclusion
2.7. References
3 City, Environment and “Sustainable Development”
3.1. Introduction
3.2. Economy and development: the political–economic approach to the city
3.3. Urban research renewed by environmental issues
3.4. Conclusion
3.5. References
4 Locating Heritage in the Cities of the South
4.1. Introduction
4.2. Heritagization: between dominant logics and the logics of domination
4.3. A daily relationship with the infra-heritage
4.4. Conclusion
4.5. References
Part 2: Themes and Common Objects to Cross Global Changes and Territorial Dynamics
5 The European Union and the Energy Transition: Development, Environment and Regional Integration
5.1. Introduction
5.2. Integration, energy transition and space
5.3. The energy transition as a lever for integration
5.4. European energy transition and integration in practice: conflicts of actors and problems of scale
5.5. Conclusion
5.6. References
6 Transport in Africa
6.1. African transport in search of modernity
6.2. Transport transformations: between dependencies, resistances and adaptations
6.3. Promises and risks in African transport
6.4. Conclusion
6.5. References
7 Digital Revolution in Urban Transportation of the Southern Cities Questioned
7.1. Introduction
7.2. Transformations in transport and the emergence of digital technology, a crucial “moment”
2
in the metropolization process in the South
7.3. The role of digital technology in the transformations currently underway
7.4. Digital technology: a new front for negotiation in paratransit transport
7.5. Conclusion
7.6. References
8 Artisanal and Small-scale Gold Mining and Territorial Development in Africa
8.1. Introduction
8.2. The (re)emergence of the gold resource
8.3. Methods of governing the operation
8.4. Questioning development from ASM activity
8.5. Conclusion
8.6. References
9 New Approaches to City–Countryside Relations
9.1. Introduction
9.2. The city–countryside contact: front or transition zone, urban periphery and peri-urban spaces
9.3. New scales at play in the systems of relations between cities and the countryside
9.4. Conclusion
9.5. References
10 Using Scientific Modeling for Adaptation of Agriculture to Climate Change: A Political and Organizational Challenge
10.1. Introduction
10.2. Unequal countries facing regionalized modeling
10.3. Strategies embedded in pre-existing modes of organization
10.4. Concrete progress through projects on different scales of action
10.5. Conclusion
10.6. References
11 Hydrogeography
11.1. Introduction
11.2. Epistemology of water issues in geography
11.3. The study of complex anthropized hydrosystems
11.4. How can the hybrid nature of hydrosystems be taken into account in the management of water-related resources?
11.5. Conclusion
11.6. References
Part 3: Knowledge Production and Knowledge through the Relationship between Science and Society
12 The Ecological Transition of the Coastline in France
12.1. Introduction
12.2. Categorization of action research projects on the coasts
12.3. Research systems with variable geometry
12.4. The commitment of the French coastline in the ecological transition: elements of discussion
12.5. Conclusion: scope and limitations of the ET concept on the coasts
12.6. References
13 IPCC Reports and their Implementation into Policy: Between Science and Strategy
13.1. Introduction
13.2. The context of the creation of the IPCC
13.3. The IPCC, history and organization
13.4. IPCC reports and their interpretations
13.5. The example of the adaptation policy of Tanzanian agriculture to climate change
13.6. Conclusion
13.7. References
14 Research, Expert Assessment and Development: The Difficult Dialogue Between Social Sciences and Public Policies Around Lake Chad
14.1. Introduction
14.2. Researchers enlisted as experts: materials and motivations
14.3. Different narratives, divergent framings: decision-makers and researchers facing the future of Lake Chad
14.4. Production and circulation of messages from researchers remobilized in public action
14.5. Conclusion
14.6. References
List of Authors
Index
Other titles from iSTE in Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Management
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 7
Table 7.1
Urban transport characteristics data and penetration of digital de
...
Chapter 12
Table 12.1
Sustainable development issues bounded by the positionings betwee
...
Table 12.2
Methods and tools of action research projects involving UMR Prodi
...
List of Illustrations
Chapter 1
Figure 1.1
The food transition model in three phases for the case of Vietnam
...
Chapter 2
Figure 2.1
Territorialization of the Chilean crisis (Concepción earthquake)
...
Figure 2.2
Projection and territorialization in Lima of the Japanese and Chi
...
Figure 2.3
The rich city of the developers also produces risk: construction
...
Chapter 5
Figure 5.1
Integration models: initial model (by A. Palle).
Figure 5.2
Integration models: European extreme (by A. Palle).
Figure 5.3
Integration models: local extreme (realized by A. Palle).
Figure 5.4
Integration models: macro-regional model (by A. Palle).
Figure 5.5
Integration models: hybrid model (by A. Palle).
Chapter 7
Figure 7.1
Map of public and paratransit transport networks (Sources: NYU Ur
...
Figure 7.2
Informal “clandos” cabs in Keur Massar on the outskirts of Dakar
...
Figure 7.3
Sticker that emphasizes modernity “unit under video surveillance”
...
Chapter 8
Figure 8.1
Spatialities of ASGM in West Africa and the Sahel
Chapter 11
Figure 11.1
Sediment dynamics of the Peynin watershed (Queyras, French South
...
Figure 11.2
Hydraulic equipment (jessours and tabias) introduced in the in t
...
Figure 11.3
The spillway basin, integrator of the watershed and hydraulic sp
...
Figure 11.4
Territorial evolution of water management in the Provinois, Sein
...
Chapter 14
Figure 14.1
Two opposing representations of the dynamics of Lake Chad. Top:
...
Figure 14.2
From one form of expert assessment to the other. Framing and sca
...
Figure 14.3
Two irreconcilable visions at COP 21 (in pink, Minister of the E
...
Guide
Cover Page
Title Page
Copyright Page
Acknowledgments
Introducation
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
List of Authors
Index
Other titles from iSTE in Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Management
Wiley End User License Agreement
Pages
iii
iv
xiii
xv
xvi
xvii
xviii
xix
xx
xxi
xxii
xxiii
xxiv
xxv
xxvi
xxvii
xxviii
xxix
xxx
xxxi
xxxii
xxxiii
xxxiv
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
Development and Territorial Restructuring in an Era of Global Change
Theories, Approaches and Future Research Perspectives
Edited by
Élisabeth PeyrouxChristine RaimondVincent VielÉmilie Lavie
First published 2023 in Great Britain and the United States by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms and licenses issued by the CLA. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms should be sent to the publishers at the undermentioned address:
ISTE Ltd
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
27-37 St George’s Road
111 River Street
London SW19 4EU
Hoboken, NJ 07030
UK
USA
www.iste.co.uk
www.wiley.com
© ISTE Ltd 2023The rights of Élisabeth Peyroux, Christine Raimond, Vincent Viel and Émilie Lavie to be identified as the authors of this work have been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s), contributor(s) or editor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of ISTE Group.
Library of Congress Control Number: 2022950068
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication DataA CIP record for this book is available from the British LibraryISBN 978-1-78630-653-1
Acknowledgments
This book is based on research conducted by the UMR Prodig. We would like to thank all contributors for participating in this collective and fruitful endeavor. We would also like to thank the reviewers of the first versions of the chapters for their valuable comments and suggestions: Frédéric Bertrand, Armelle Choplin, Hubert Cochet, Emeric Lendjel, Jérôme Lombard, Benjamin Lysaniuk, Malika Madelin, Géraud Magrin, Karine Peyronnie, Alain Piveteau, Anne Julia Rollet, Yohan Sahraoui and Julie Trottier.
Finally, we would like to acknowledge the contribution of Jean Menut in proofreading and editing the bibliographical references and extend our thanks and appreciation to Catherine Valton for her contribution to the maps and the formatting of the illustrations.
IntroductionLinking Environment and Development at a Time of Global Changes: A Challenge for Geography and Social Sciences
Scientific challenges
The Anthropocene is a challenge for research in the humanities and social sciences, and more particularly for geography. Both must tackle numerous issues, including that of thinking jointly about development and the environment. This implies exploring global changes and their impacts on territories taking into consideration territorial and environmental governance on various decision-making scales.
Overcoming disciplinary divides and opening up new epistemological perspectives
The notion of global changes is increasingly used to account for all the changes observed since the second half of the 20th century: climate change, degradation of natural resources, demographic transition, worldwide urbanization, economic globalization and global migration. These global changes make the analysis of the links between environment and development more complex. On the one hand, they imply crossing societal and environmental issues by mobilizing the humanities and social sciences as well as natural sciences to analyze the interactions between biogeophysical systems and human activities. On the other hand, they imply a cross-scale analysis (international, regional, national, local) and to pay attention to contexts of development (from the richest countries to the margins of the world system) to account for the diversity of physical manifestations, political responses and socio-spatial dynamics of these changes (Lombard et al. 2006).
Geography, the discipline mostly represented in this book, is well positioned to meet the challenges of a systemic approach to our world through its attention to spaces, places and scales, to the relations between societies and their environment, to territories and contexts. By taking part in a renewed dialogue between disciplines and studies around several key objects or concepts geography can also make a significant contribution to help decipher the factors and effects of global changes on territories.
While the spatiality of processes or “the spatial referents of actions, experiences and imaginaries” is becoming a “shared perspective” for many disciplines (Volvey et al. 2021, p. 34), geography pays particular attention to how territories are constructed and appropriated, their lability, and to spatial arrangements rather than spatial structures (Stock et al. 2021). It takes into account the power relationships underlying the exploitation of resources, governance or territorial integration strategies by highlighting their spatial implications (inequalities, fragmentation, polarization).
Similarly, in a context of growing concern about the effects of climate change, many disciplines are taking up environmental issues (Chartier and Rodary 2016) and contributing to the broadening of the notion (by including biodiversity, water and air quality, interactions between non-human and human components). Geographers, who have been catching up with this trend more recently, try to overcome the disciplinary divides and open up new epistemological perspectives to rethink the interface between societies and the environment.
Initially addressed by physical and then human geography, environmental studies have diversified by embracing the human–nature relationship. Many current approaches dealing with the environment build on constructivist approaches in geography (Georges 1971; Bertrand and Bertrand 2002) and beyond, in the social sciences. These have challenged the dichotomy between nature and culture, the division between the physical and the social, or between the physical and the cultural realms (Baviskar 2003; Latour 2014). The work on globalized resources, apprehended as a social construction, notably based on Raffestin (1980), also participated in this opening of geography to constructivist approaches (Magrin et al. 2015a). The environment, resulting from the interactions between physical, chemical, biological and social processes, becomes a hybrid and complex object for the social sciences, which calls for inter and multidisciplinarity (Rakoto Ramiarantsoa et al. 2012; Chartier and Rodary 2016; Dufour and Lespez 2020). As a social construct, it requires scientists to consider the interactions between development, planning and conservation policies, and geographers to help conceptualize their spatialization. The need to conserve resources upstream of productive activities and to impact them as little as possible downstream, the emergence of the notion of the commons, as well as ethical questions related to rights of access to resources, also raise questions about desirable futures and their underlying values (Ogé 2014, 2016).
The attention paid to the environment and the fact that geography is increasingly borrowing from anthropology and sociology have also played a role in renewing approaches to risks and crises associated with global changes (Sierra 2020). Moving away from a narrow focus on context (as with objectivist and culturalist approaches to risk) they now seek to identify the “overall dynamics”, emphasizing representations, strategies, discourses and the construction of viewpoints (Coanus 2020, p. 738), and mobilize new concepts (fragility, vulnerability) (Sierra 2020). Taking into account the systemic nature of the risks linked to global change implies thinking about complexity, multiscalarity and temporality (Raimond et al. 2019). This means taking into account the “highly evolving systemic effects” of climate change in a context where the paradigm of uncertainty as theorized by Beck (1986), is being reinforced by the worsening of environmental degradation and the link between health crises and environmental crises (Cramer et al. 2020, p. 6).
Constructivist and critical approaches also challenge the notion of development traditionally attached to the study of “developing” countries. This takes place through deconstruction and decentering.
The term development has long been based on an economic approach (GDP growth and wealth inequality) and a modernist and linear Western vision of progress based on the economic take-off modeled by Rostow (1962). It was based on the idea that countries will “catch-up” and shift from “underdeveloped” countries to “developing” countries, including LDCs (“Least Developed Countries”), then to “emerging” or even “developed” countries. This understanding is part of a long history (colonial, then linked to development aid and current geopolitical issues) that has seen many theoretical approaches (from modernist to dependency approaches, from tropical geography to Third World geography). This is being challenged by a plurality of perspectives carried by postcolonial critical approaches and subaltern studies and more recently by post-development studies (Rist 2007; Ziai 2013, 2015; Dubresson 2020; Koop 2021).
This goes along with alternative thinking to the productivist conceptions of growth and economic development of the 1970s and 1980s, as promoted by neoliberal doctrines, as well as with by broader conceptions of development that integrate qualitative and relational indicators (Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index, well-being of populations, approaches in terms of capabilities). The role of certain actors (women, indigenous and local communities, NGOs, diasporas) has more recently been integrated into social science research (Smouts 2005), which has opened up questions of equity and social justice. Country typologies have become more complex as development models conceived in the North have stumbled over national realities (Chaléard and Sanjuan 2017). New economic categories (“emerging” countries, “high-, middle- or low-income” countries), the relevance of which are debated (Piveteau et al. 2013), have been proposed attesting to the blurring of rankings and development trajectories (Chaléard 2014).
This paradigm shift in studies of development and global changes is currently reshaping the analysis of the links between the environment and development within geography (from “preservationism” to “exploitationism”, from regulation by resource use to “neo-populism” that emphasizes human agentivity) (Haan 2000, p. 360). The concept of “sustainable development”, which emerged in the 1980s, aimed to reduce the tensions and incompatibilities between environment and development, that is between economic growth and the conservation of natural resources. A useful conceptual tool for some (Emelianof 2007), a communication tool devoid of scientific meaning for others (Tsayem-Demase 2011; Chartier and Rodary 2016), the notion of sustainable development has been criticized for its ambiguity (origin, definitions, objectives), its empty rhetoric and its association with the market economy and capitalism (Theys 2014). Not only are modernist and universal values and principles being questioned, but also the very notion of development has been replaced in recent years by the notion of transition (Magrin and Ninot 2020), which involves rethinking questions of trajectories and temporality.
This notion of transition has been gradually replaced by the term “sustainability” in a societal and epistemological context strongly impacted by the debate on climate change and the Anthropocene (Felli 2015). This has been prompted by environmental crises (Bonneuil and Fressoz 2013), economic uncertainties and socio-economic problems that emerged in the post-2008 recessionary period, which some refer to as a polycrisis (Swilling and Annecke 2012). It goes hand in hand with the vanishing idea that the world is predictable and that a return to normality after a crisis is possible (Gunderson and Holling 2001): the linear development based on Rostow and the idea of a “stationary regime”, carried by the notion of sustainable development, are undermined in a context where “structural uncertainties” are recognized and a “world of limits” acknowledged a situation that resilience approaches try to account for (Bonneuil and Fressoz 2013, pp. 39–42; Reghezza-Zit and Rufat 2015). Sustainability is situated in a broader context of social responses to global warming: it is expected to foster “ecological awareness” (Arias-Maldonado 2013, p. 429). In addition to recognizing that the category “natural” is no longer relevant, it takes greater account of the complexity and changing nature of environmental dynamics that impact human life and therefore the nonlinear dynamics of the human–natural system (Peyroux et al. 2014). Sustainability studies pay attention to practices, policies and actions. However, this concept, which mixes “scientific judgments, moral values and ideological positions” (Arias-Maldonado 2013, p. 433), remains debatable. Sustainability is seen as a “powerful idea” but a “vague concept” (Arias-Maldonado 2013, p. 428), a “strange theoretical abstraction that has nothing to do with our daily lives” (“the politics of never getting there”) (Foster 2008, p. 66).
There is an ongoing debate about the relevance of other concepts (such as ecosystem services) (Arnauld de Sartre et al. 2014) as well as about the notion of Anthropocene (Cynorhodon 2020). The latter challenges our analytical frameworks (Latour 2014): by reformulating human agentivity in terms of moral and political responsibility, by reopening the classical question in anthropology “of what is common and specific in the different ways of inhabiting the earth” (Latour 2014, p. 7), by seizing all disciplines by the “urgency of doing something” and by questioning the “political relevance” of the work of researchers. More generally, it redefines “spatial and temporal coordinates as well as the right kind of agentivity” (Latour 2014, p. 16).
The decentering that is taking place concomitantly with this deconstruction in the field of geography, and more broadly in development studies, is part of a larger movement that challenges the vision of progress as certain, linear, sequential and based on the models of Western societies. It also questions the fact that developing countries will “catch up” with Western countries, recognizing that “leapfrogging” and bifurcations are possible (Ninot and Peyroux 2018; Magrin and Ninot 2020). This decentering also takes place in the scientific and operational field by recognizing asymmetries between various types of knowledge (Western, indigenous, vernacular, lay, scholarly and expert), by calling for stronger integration and involvement of different actors (Stock et al. 2021), which are now gaining momentum in the participatory science and open science movements.
From development to “transitions“
The concept of transition has tended to replace the concept of sustainable development in research and in certain public policies since the 2000s, although international institutions maintain their interest in “sustainability” (such as the 2015 Sustainable Development Goals, see above). Transition is generally understood dynamically as the passage from one state to another over time. Research focuses on the nature of changes, the dynamics of evolution, temporalities and increasingly on how to guide these transitions.
Initially, the term transition was used to refer to demographic, economic, urban and political transitions over the long-term (e.g. demographic transitions in Latin America, post-Soviet transitions in Eastern Europe or post-apartheid transitions in Southern Africa), emphasizing the interdependence of transition processes (Beucher and Mare 2020). In the environmental field it has taken several forms and adopts different epistemological positions.
The term transition, as it has been used since the 2000s, is part of the quest for a new societal model for Western capitalist countries impacted by the multiple crises of the early 21st century (Koop 2021). For Padovani and Lysaniuk (2019), studying transitions means defining upstream the “states” of the system and then analyzing the time of the transformation from one system to another. The change of state can be unexpected or planned and scheduled, which implies managing it. They for that matter consider the transition as a “period”, the passage from one state to another, an intermediate state, a process between two ends within a constantly changing system (Padovani and Lysaniuk 2019, p. 10). This approach to transition builds on the notion of “recrystallization” by K. Lewin, an American psychologist. Coudroy de Lille et al. (2017) add that there is a difference between change – which is a form of continuity – and transition, which they define as “mutation in the course of a linear process that can be repeated in the form of cycles” (Padovani and Lysaniuk 2019, p. 10). For these authors, because of the dynamics involved, the transition implies a systemic rather than an analytical analysis: in their view, it is appropriate to study the “generating force of change from the initial state”, the disequilibrium, and the emergence of a new state that corresponds to the final phase of the transition (Padovani and Lysaniuk 2029, p. 11).
Valeagas (2020) considers the transition as a fundamental reconfiguration rather than a simple adjustment. He calls for distinguishing transitions as defined by the observation of past or current phenomena (demographic, democratic) and transitions that are the result of an intention, “a watchword prescribing practices” as illustrated by the ecological transition (Valeagas 2020, p. 780) or the environmental transition that is being institutionalized through public policies (Beucher and Mare 2020).
Ecological and societal transition is at the heart of a specific interdisciplinary field (sustainability transition studies), which is reflected in the structuring of networks, academic institutions and journals (Peyroux et al. 2014; Koop 2021, p. 326). Some trends in sustainability transition studies focus on the analysis of socio-ecological or socio-technical systems (in terms of niches or regimes) in an often sectoral perspective (energy, water, transport). They are distinct from transition approaches in the field of urban studies, which take more into account issues of agentivity, power and learning (Baud et al. 2021). The notion of resilience is one of the concepts that helps us rethink transitions (such as vulnerability or adaptation) (Reghezza-Zit and Rufat 2015; Beucher and More 2020). For some, this concept is of particular interest to geographers to study the links between environment and development, for example, the resilience of socio-ecosystems (Lemoalle and Magrin 2014; Raimond et al. 2020). For others, its transposition from the field of ecology to that of the social sciences raises epistemological and normative problems (Metzger and Peyroux 2016).
Approach and objectives: understanding the complexity and diversity of the links between the environment and development from a territorial perspective
Given the increasing complexity of both the processes under consideration and the analytical frameworks that are needed, the objective of this collective work is to provide some analytical lenses for a deeper and renewed understanding of the links between environment and development. It focuses more particularly on the challenges posed by global changes at various territory levels. Rather than trying to find a consensus shared by a research team, the aim is to show, through a diversity of approaches and objects, how recent geography research deals with the issues identified above.
This collective book builds on the research work of a joint research unit, the UMR Prodig (Research Center on Developmental and Environmental Dynamics; Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Université de Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, Institut de recherche pour le développement, Université Paris Cité, AgroParisTech, Sorbonne Université), conducted over the past 15 years on the links between the environment and development in Northern and Southern countries in the field of social sciences. Between 2014 and 2018, a research seminar was organized to clarify how researchers positioned themselves in the above-mentioned debates, and more specifically on how they addressed the dynamics of territories in the face of global changes. The objective was to highlight the theoretical, empirical and methodological contributions, bringing together authors who did not necessarily collaborate. The 14 resulting chapters have been discussed and reworked to cover three entry points (frames of reference, empirical research objects and the relationship between science and society), which now constitute the structure of this book. They therefore provide syntheses of research covering one or two decades as well as research avenues.
The objective of this book is to show how geography, a major discipline in the UMR, handles a diversity of objects (i.e. cities, transportation, food, agriculture, energy, mining activities, coastlines, watersheds), using different methodologies (qualitative and quantitative approaches, modeling, in situ measurements) and different fieldwork methods (surveys, observation). It also engages in a dialogue between disciplines or fields (geography, political ecology, heritage studies, urban studies). Finally, it locates the research results in the advances of social sciences and natural sciences, including the geosciences, and within the diversity of knowledge production (basic research, action research, expertise).
This work thus gives an account of how geography is currently being practiced in the shifting field of social sciences (Clément et al. 2021), how it addresses the debates highlighted above, in dialogue with other disciplines, and how it is anchored in a diversity of terrains (Africa, Latin America, Europe).
Our objective is not to collectively and unanimously define the two key terms (environment and development) or even to propose a unified approach to the interactions between the environment and development, but to show how we construct research objects that articulate these two dimensions by mobilizing different approaches and methodologies, all in the context of global changes the effects of which are being felt in ecosystems and territories.
The common point of these contributions is to address these relations between the environment and development through three types of interactions: society/physical environment; space/time scales; Northern/Southern countries. They underline the importance of the collaborations between the UMR Prodig and other research institutes in France and internationally (North and South), as well as with civil society organizations. They also show how research is shaped by the establishment of structures that support inter-UMR exchanges (notably Labex Dynamite, Collège international des sciences du territoire – CIST), collaborations with partners in the South (mixed international laboratories – LMI of the IRD, international research groups – GDRI of the CNRS and the IRD) and exchanges within area studies (scientific interest groups – Groupement d’intérêt scientifique on Latin America and Africa research in France).
Most of the contributions are based on an interdisciplinary approach that covers the disciplines represented in the UMR (human and physical geography, agronomy, agro-economics, political science, sociology, economics and urban planning) and beyond. They include other social sciences as well as natural sciences (biology, ecology, geology) and physical sciences. Some of the contributions are based on a transdisciplinary, participatory approach, integrating administrative authorities and civil society in companion modeling. This approach recognizes the diversity of information and knowledge production and dissemination through social networks and open data, for example, the rapid circulation of expert and non-expert knowledge. This goes along with more open debates with civil society, as well as with controversies (e.g. the contestation of the concept of nature and of the extent of climate change) that challenge the legitimacy of different forms of knowledge. This book also provides the opportunity to question our analytical, modeling and predictive capacities and their limits, particularly with regard to anticipating and measuring the long-term impacts of climate change.
Finally, by highlighting the interactions between urban development, risk management, production systems, and the protection of nature and biodiversity this collective book brings together issues that are often dealt with separately in the literature. Focusing on the fieldwork, both from a qualitative and a quantitative point of view, provides a detailed account of the processes at work, highlighting the diversity of contexts in terms of the physical and environmental manifestations, the political responses and the spatial dynamics of global changes.
Moreover, to deal with the relations between development and the environment, we adopt a cross-cutting perspective on territorial restructuring, paying attention to the construction and circulation of norms and structures of power relations. Looking critically at instruments, categories and representations, as well as modes of regulation and governance leads to a better understanding of the power relationships between actors and the way they contribute to socio-economic and socio-spatial discrimination and inequality. Studying the production and circulation of North/South and South/South models (Magrin et al. 2015b) shows how different fields of policy making connect and interact, ranging from the social construction of problems to the creation of spaces for deliberation, from modes of governance to the emergence of new referentials for public action.
This overview of research is not exhaustive: some topics addressed in the UMR, or certain geographical areas, could not be included in this book, although they contribute to the construction of our knowledge and to our comparative and interdisciplinary approaches: this includes analytical and methodological issues in relation to poverty in Europe (Ribardière et al. 2014), access to urban resources in a migratory context (Ribardière 2017), territorial recompositions and the circulation of international models in Asian cities (China, Japan, Southeast Asia) (Franck and Sanjuan 2015), public health issues in Europe and the South (Lysaniuk and Durrafour 2013; Lysaniuk and Tabeaud 2015), health–society–environment interactions in the Indian Ocean (Herbreteau and Taglioni 2015), comparative agricultures in the South (Cochet et al. 2018), the use of environmental geographic information in Latin America (Gautreau and Noucher 2013; Gautreau 2021), simulation and modeling applied to environmental issues in France (Delbart et al. 2015; Bétard et al. 2016) or in Southern countries (Bécu et al. 2014), geopolitics and territorial issues of the illicit drug economy in Southeast Asia (Chouvy 2013, pp. 1–28), or political issues around water in the Middle East (Brooks and Trottier 2020), to name the main ones.
Presentation of the book
The 14 chapters gathered in this book are divided into three parts. The first part composed of four chapters, examines the continuities or the shift of paradigms in a context of profound transformation of our societies, be it linked to the environmental changes observed in recent decades or to the rapid mutations linked to the diffusion of new technologies. The second part proposes seven themes – and therefore seven chapters – to discuss the effects of such changes on territories, representations and practices. Finally, in the third part, three chapters focus on the positions that we can adopt (e.g. research-action, expertise) to better understand the complexity of social relationships and their spatial inscription in a changing world.
The first part questions the frames of reference in which our research is embedded. What are the paradigms that bring us together and/or challenge us? Which models are being debated? The chapters underline how new paradigms are combined with old ones or replace each other: sustainable development and sustainability, sustainable development and resilience, development and transition. They take into account the circulation and transfers of models that are accelerating and diversifying today. Indeed, they are no longer limited to the application to the South of models developed in the North.
Chapter 1 discusses the relevance of the Northern models and their replicability in the South with a focus on food transition. Christine Raimond, Cécile Faliès, Angèle Proust and Bernard Tallet question whether it should be considered as a universal notion, a predictive model or a mere concept . This analysis is based on the fieldwork that has been carried out for a long time by members of UMR Prodig in developing and emerging countries in Africa, Asia and South America. It sheds light on heterogeneous situations from an historical, social, economic and political point of view. The authors highlight the importance of places and links between agricultural production and consumption, as well as the importance of asymmetrical power relations between actors and the ways in which they unfold in the highly diverse territories of the South. Therefore, this chapter first demonstrates that beyond the apparent global standardization of the model that it suggests, the food transition model is less universal than it seems. Then, it demonstrates that the trajectories are shaped not only by socio-economic factors, but also by political and cultural issues and the mobilization of actors in favor of fairer food systems.
Chapter 2 highlights the relevance of the concepts of risk and crisis to study the link between urban environment and development issues. These concepts, analyzed at different spatial and territorial scales, allow rethinking the relationships between society and the environment. They allow us to grasp paroxysmal situations that bring into play the multiple interactions between physico-chemical, biological and social dynamics in a geosystem. Based on the work carried out in South America and Tunisia, Alexis Sierra, Anaïs Béji, Axelle Croisé, Cyriaque Hattemer, Pascale Metzger, Marie Pigeolet and Irene Valittuto demonstrate that the spread of discourse on the crisis from one city to another and from one scale to another is the work of local actors. These actors project a distant crisis onto their own territory, according to their own approach to risk, which translates into controversies about the nature of development and the local environment.
In Chapter 3, Élisabeth Peyroux and Pascale Metzger look into the growing role of the environment in development policies. Based on a broad bibliographical synthesis in the field of urban research, the authors describe the way in which approaches to the city have evolved, from a mainly politico-economic reading to works integrating environmental issues, from both physical and political perspectives. They underline the epistemological challenges facing urban research. They also show the paradoxes and challenges facing research on the “sustainable city”, between local innovations and global governance, and present some research avenues which, by opening up to new objects and new issues, are making the city an increasingly complex and hybrid object.
Chapter 4 argues that the pluralization of actors, categories and heritage elements requires going beyond the monumental, artistic and scientific dimensions of heritage. It proposes examining, with an alternative approach influenced by Southern theories, what constitutes a heritage practice in the cities of the South, whether or not it relates to heritage institutions. By crossing the results of surveys conducted in Valparaiso and Yaoundé, Sébastien Jacquot, Marie Morelle and Muriel Samé Ekobo propose a critical approach to the usual theoretical frameworks of “patrimonialization” or “heritage”. They reveal the presence of an “infra-heritage”, designating practices of preservation and transmission that are neither recognized by public policies nor formally qualified in heritage terms by the individuals or groups concerned, but which are key to understanding urban transformations.
The second part deals with shared research objects among Prodig researchers. Working on a wide variety of fields and themes helps to overcome a certain number of obstacles in the analysis of the interactions between environment and development. Our research objects contribute to a better understanding of the dynamics of environments and societies through a systemic approach and in the context of climate change, from physical processes to uses (resources, food, energy, transport, urban services). Questions regularly addressed are those of protection, degradation or exploitation (heritage, food, agricultural, energy, natural resources) issues of access to collective services (urban services, infrastructure, transportation), as well as those related to regional integration and associated public policies.
In Chapter 5, Angélique Palle and Yann Richard continue the reflection begun in the first part of this chapter on transition issues. They question the conceptual and political frameworks that underpin the objective of energy transition, which the EU has made a priority in numerous speeches and official documents in response to global change. By underlining the complex challenges related to scales within this policy framework, the authors question whether this transition is compatible with European energy integration, as it was conceived in the 1990s around the liberalization of energy markets. After showing that the European energy transition is situated at the crossroads of a multiplicity of research fields (the social and political construction of spatial scales, governance, regional integration and the construction of Europe), the authors describe the way in which the EU (as an institution) understands the notion of energy transition as political positioning, an economic strategy and an instrument of power. Finally, they identify the spatial construction models towards which the ongoing regional integration is moving the European energy space based on a series of spatial models.
Chapter 6 addresses the issue of transport in Africa and the way it shapes territories. Jérôme Lombard, Nora Mareï and Olivier Ninot propose taking a critical look at the developments, political orientations and societal choices that have guided the organization of transport networks, as well as their effects at different scales. They note a growing disconnection between the geographical scales of transport in Africa: while African countries are increasingly better connected to the world by various networks, including those of transport, it is still difficult, if not impossible, to travel by road between certain parts of national territories and in certain urban districts, particularly in capital cities. They demonstrate the major role played by national and supranational public policies, as well as the programs of international donors, in promoting transport corridors and metropolitan regions to the detriment of non-hierarchical and looser networks in less dense areas. At the end of this chapter, the authors propose several ways to consolidate the place of local territories within globalization.
Chapter 7 aims to better understand the role of digital tools in accessing transport services. Kei Tanikawa Obregón, Lisa Coulaud and Olivier Ninot propose, from a dual epistemological position – socio-technical systems and the circulation of models – a discussion on the transposability of intelligent mobility models. ICT (Information and Communication Technologies) participate in the definition of new forms of urban governance of large cities in the South. Based on research located in Mexico City, Accra and Dakar, the authors discuss the urban fabric and development models taking into account the role of informality in accessing individual and collective transport services. This chapter shows that despite the innovations promised by ICT, the economic system is not undergoing a real transformation. In this context, the transition to a new model can only be made by taking informality into account in the organization of transport networks.
Chapter 8 sheds light on the ways in which the formalization and territorialization of gold mining in Africa are put in place in order to question their socio-economic and environmental effects on development at the local level. Based on the fieldwork carried out in a wide variety of countries in the northern part of Africa, Anna Dessertine, Raphaëlle Chevrillon-Guibert, Laurent Gagnol, Julie Betabelet, Lamine Diallo, Robin Petit-Roulet, Edith Sawadogo, Tongnoma Zongo and Géraud Magrin discuss the hypothesis that the current period is characterized by a tension between the repression of gold panning in favor of industrial mines and the State’s takeover of an artisanal sector that is being mechanized, producing contrasting effects in terms of development and environmental impacts. After describing the different forms of emergence or re-emergence of the gold resource, this chapter questions the power issues that govern its regulation. Finally, it discusses the relationship between its exploitation and the development of territories.
Chapter 9 provides a synthesis of renewed approaches dealing with relations between cities and the countryside, in a context of accelerated metropolization and globalization. Martine Berger and Jean-Louis Chaléard deconstruct the idea that there is a gradient between urban and rural spaces and highlight the inequalities and solidarities between cities and the countryside. Through personal research and doctoral supervision in a wide variety of fields in the South and North, the authors demonstrate the recent evolutions of the relations between cities and the countryside, with their similarities and their disparities, between interactions and tensions. Thus, while the North has a contact zone called peri-urban, the South generally sees a vast and plural periphery expanding. The agricultural question allows for discussion about complementarities, mobility, solidarity and inequalities.
Chapter 10 looks at the political and organizational challenges of using climate models for agricultural adaptation to climate change. Malika Madelin and Évelyne Mesclier discuss the hypothesis that the current structuring of climate change data tends to produce simplified information on a global scale with a focus on a few variables. This leads to an adaptation paradigm that favors equally simple and global discourses and the dissemination of a number of “good solutions” at the expense of others. Based on a comparative approach between France and Peru, the authors demonstrate that although scientific models are increasingly precise, they vary according to the territories, with equally varied uses. They suggest consideration of two scales, that of the States and their representation of vulnerabilities, and that of the farmers who translate national policies in a highly heterogeneous manner.
Chapter 11 concludes this thematic section with a discussion of the way in which watershed functioning is apprehended. Anchored in a naturalistic approach to processes, hydrogeography has been able to evolve thanks to the contributions of close critical approaches such as political ecology or critical physical geography. Integrated research on watersheds highlights the complexity of the social, political and economic processes that drive them. Past, present and future trajectories are linked to climatic contexts or to environmental management practices, particularly those related to soil (e.g. urbanization, intensification or agricultural abandonment). Vincent Viel, Émilie Lavie, Guillaume Brousse, Benoît Carlier, Luc Michler, Mathilde Resch, Gashin Shashavari and Gilles Arnaud-Fassetta demonstrate that the so-called natural processes that drive the functioning of watersheds are strongly anthropized. The authors argue that the epistemological and methodological contexts have made it possible to refine the understanding of the complexity of the processes, leading to a rethinking of the management of hydrosystems.
The third part highlights the approaches, methods and sources used within Prodig and the way in which they participate in the different modes of knowledge production. Among our competences, there is first of all the collective capacity to combine advanced analysis of environmental changes with social, political and economic changes at different scales using both quantitative (field metrology, statistics, cartographic and spatial data processing) and qualitative methodologies (mainly field surveys). Second, our field-centered approach goes along with a diversity of geographical areas (on four continents, in gray areas that are difficult to access for security reasons) and work in partnership. The research brings together, in varying proportions, the collection of existing data (which is hampered by a lack of human resources!), the creation and coupling of quantitative and qualitative data, modeling, data processing, the development of methodological tools (including collaborations with Géotheca/Université Paris Cité and the Spatial Center) and spatial analysis. Finally, a last competence of the UMR is based the a posteriori valorization, in forms as diverse as the frequent participation in expert appraisals and/or the diffusion of research results via Géoportail.
Chapter 12 proposes an analysis of the ecological transition in France via the example of coastal zone management. Frédéric Bertrand and Brice Anselme draw on the synthesis of results from a decade of research on paradigm shifts in state management policies. They highlight a contrasted assessment of the ecological transition of the French metropolitan and ultra-marine coastlines, which have not succeeded in finding an intermediate position between weak and strong sustainability models. The authors thus show that adaptive responses to global change depend on the local combination of multiple factors, such as the mobilization of existing legal tools, the evaluation of costs and benefits, the valuation of long-term benefits, the methods of communication and consultation, and the restoration of coastal areas released for protection purposes (e.g. depoldering).
Chapter 13 analyzes the way the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) is functioning and how its results and publications are used. After recalling the context of the creation of the IPCC, whose emergence appears to be an historical process of gathering and making available scientific work from various disciplines and covering various fields, Hubert Cochet and Jean-Claude Bergès highlight the discrepancy between the richness of databases gathered by the IPCC experts and their recommendations, on the one hand, and the sometimes, somewhat simplistic use made of it by certain scientific teams for political promotion purposes, on the other hand. To do this, they use the example of the adaptation of Tanzanian agriculture to climate change, which shows that the partial use of the IPCC results from Volume 1 of the fifth report can lead to conclusions that are the antithesis of those advocated by many experts who participated in the drafting of Volume 2 of the same report or those put forward by other research communities involved in these issues.
Chapter 14 concludes this collection of chapters with the synthesis of a not so common research practice: expertise. Based on their experience in this area around Lake Chad, Géraud Magrin, Charline Rangé, Audrey Koumraït Mbagogo, Abdourahamani Mahamadou, Jacques Lemoalle and Christine Raimond emphasize that expertise constitutes one of the instruments of the political work of researchers, which allows them, at a time when access to the field through the usual channels is difficult, to influence the balance of power at the heart of the process of selecting ideas that precedes and/or justifies action. The authors thus show that the knowledge and messages produced through expertise essentially affect the sponsors (international donors), but that ideas also circulate beyond them to national decision-makers or society, according to complex infusion processes. Networks of research/experts/investigators/donors are then structured and form a hybrid complex where research and expertise are embedded, likely to feed research work. The North/South asymmetry that is becoming more pronounced, however, poses limits in terms of the legitimacy of the ideas put into circulation.
References
Arias-Maldonado, M. (2013). Rethinking sustainability in the Anthropocene.
Environmental Politics
, 22(3), 428–446.
Arnauld de Sartre, X., Oszwald, J., Castro, M., Dufour, S. (2014).
Political ecology des services écosystémique.
Peter Lang AG, Bern.
Baud, I., Jameson, S., Peyroux, É., Scott, D. (2021). The urban governance configuration: A conceptual framework for understanding complexity and enhancing transitions to greater sustainability in cities.
Geography Compass
[Online]. Available at:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gec3.12562
[Accessed 15 September 2021].
Baviskar, A. (2003). For a cultural politics of natural resources.
Economic and Political Weekly
, 38(48), 5051–5055.
Beck, U. (1986).
La société du risque. Sur la voie d’une autre modernité.
Aubier, Paris.
Bécu, N., Raimond, C., Garine, E., Deconchat, M., Kokou, K. (2014). Coupling environmental and social processes to simulate the emergence of a Savannah landscape mosaic under shifting cultivation and assess its sustainability.
Journal of Artificial Society and Social Simulation
, 17(1) [Online]. Available at:
https://www.jasss.org/17/1/1.html
[Accessed 30 September 2021].
Bertrand, C. and Bertrand, D. (2002).
Une géographie traversière
.
L’environnement à travers territoires et territorialités.
Arguments, Paris.
Bétard, F., Dansurand, G., Poiraud, A., Viette, P., Kuhnel, A. (2016). Multifinality in geoheritage inventories: A cross-cutting approach of geotourism and geoconservation issues in the “Causses du Quercy” Regional Natural Park (Lot, SW France). In
Actes du congrès international – Les inventaires du géopatrimoine
, Cornée, A., Egoro, G., De Wever, P., Lalanne, A., Duranthon, F. (eds). Soc. Géol. Fr., Toulouse.
Beucher, S. and Mare, M. (2020). Cadrage épistémologique de la notion de transition en sciences humaines et sociales et en géographie.
Bulletin de l’Association de Géographes Français
, 2020–4, 383–394.
Bonneuil, C. and Fressoz, J.B. (2013).
L’événement anthropocène. La terre, l’histoire et nous.
Le Seuil, Paris.
Brooks, D. and Trottier, J. (2020). Moving water from last to first in the Middle East peace process.
International Journal of Water Resources Development
, 37(4), 741–745.
Chaléard, J.L. (2014). Réflexions de géographe sur des mots autour du développement. In
Communication au “séminaire central”
. UMR Prodig, Paris.
Chaléard, J.-L. and Sanjuan, T. (2017).
Géographie du développement. Territoires et mondialisation dans les Suds
. Armand Colin, Paris.
Chartier, D. and Rodary, E. (eds) (2016).
Manifeste pour une géographie environnementale : Géographie, écologie, politique.
Presses de Sciences Po, Paris.
Chouvy, P.-A. (ed.) (2013).
An Atlas of Trafficking in Southeast Asia. The Illegal Trade in Arms, Drugs, People, Counterfeit Goods and Natural Resources in Mainland Southeast Asia.
IRASEC, London/Bangkok.
Clément, V., Stock, M., Volvey, A. (eds) (2021).
Mouvements de géographie. Une science sociale au tournant
. Éditions Universitaires de Rennes, Rennes.
Coanus, T. (2020). Risque. Epistémologie. In
Dictionnaire critique de l’Anthropocène
, Cynorhodon (ed.). CNRS, Paris.
Cochet, H., Ducourtieux, O., Garambois, N. (2018).
Systèmes agraires et changement climatique au sud. Les chemins de l’adaptation
. Editions Quae, Versailles.
Coudroy de Lille, L., Rivière-Honegger, A., Rolland, L., Volin, A. (2017). Notion à la une : Transition.
Géoconfluences
[Online]. Available at:
http://geoconfluences.ens-lyon.fr/informations-scientifiques/a-la-une/notion-a-la-une/notion-transition
[Accessed 15 September 2021].
Cramer, W., Criqui, P., Guégan, J.F., Le Treut, H., Lebel, T., Lecocq, F., Le Roux, X., Malijean-Dubois, S. (2020). La recherche sur les changements globaux à l’épreuve de la Covid-19 [Online]. Available at:
http://www.bruno-latour.fr/sites/default/files/139-AAA-Washington.pdf
[Accessed 15 September 2021].
Cynorhodon (2020).
Dictionnaire critique de l’Anthropocène
. CNRS, Paris.
Delbart, N., Dunesme, S., Lavie, E., Madelin, M., Goma, R. (2015). Remote sensing of Andean mountain snow cover to forecast water discharge of Cuyo rivers.
Journal of Alpine Research
, 103(2).
Dubresson, A. (2020). Développement. In
Dictionnaire critique de l’Anthropocène
, Cynorhodon (ed.). CNRS, Paris.
Dufour, S. and Lespez, L. (2020).
Géographie de l’environnement : La nature au temps de l’anthropocène
. Armand Colin, Paris.
Emelianof, C. (2007). La ville durable : L’hypothèse d’un tournant urbanistique en Europe.
L’information géographique
, 71, 48
–
65.
Felli, R. (2015). La durabilité ou l’escamotage du développement durable.
Raisons politiques
, 60, 149
–
160 [Online]. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.3917/rai.060.0149
[Accessed 15 September 2021].
Foster, J. (2008).
The Sustainability Mirage: Illusion and Reality in the Coming War on Climate Change
. Earthscan, London.
Franck, M. and Sanjuan, T. (eds) (2015).
Territoires de l’urbain en Asie. Une nouvelle modernité ?
CNRS, Paris.
Gautreau, P. (2021).
La Pachamama en bases de données : Géographie politique de l’information environnementale contemporaine
. Éditions de l’IHEAL, Paris.
Gautreau, P. and Noucher, M. (2013). Gouvernance informationnelle de l’environnement et partage en ligne des données publiques. Politiques et pratiques de l’opendata environnemental (Amérique du sud – France).
Introduction au numéro spécial de la revue. Networks and Communication Studies
, 27(1–2), 5
–
21.
George, P. (1971).
L’environnement.
PUF, Paris.
Gunderson, L.H. and Holling, C.S. (2001).
Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems
. Island Press, Washington, DC.
Haan, L.J. (2000). The question of development and environment in geography in the era of globalization.
Geo Journal
, 50, 359–367.
Herbreteau, V. and Taglioni, F. (2015). Interactions santé-sociétés-environnement : Étude du paludisme et de la leptospirose à Mayotte. Report, IRD/Ministère de l’Outre-mer, 2012–2015, IRD, 46.
Koop, K. (2021). La géographie du développement a perdu le Nord et alors ! Plaidoyer pour une géographie des transitions sociétales. In
Mouvements de géographie. Une science sociale au tournant
, Clément, V., Stock, M., Volvey, A. (eds). Presses Universitaires de Rennes, Rennes.
Latour, B. (2014). Anthropology at the time of the Anthropocene – A personal view of what is to be studied
. Lecture at the American Anthropologists Association Meeting
, Washington, 1–16 [Online]. Available at:
http://www.bruno-latour.fr/sites/default/files/139-AAA-Washington.pdf
[Accessed 30 August 2021].
Lemoalle, J. and Magrin, G. (eds) (2014). Le développement du lac Tchad : Situation actuelle et futurs possibles. Synthesis report, Contributions intégrales des experts, 66.
Lombard, J., Mesclier, É., Velut, S. (eds) (2006).
La mondialisation côté Sud. Acteurs et territoires
. IRD, Paris.
Lysaniuk, B. and Durrafour, F. (2013). L’apport des SHS dans un programme de santé publique : L’exemple de la géographie et de l’approche SMA dans Tolimmunpal.
Communication au séminaire de l’UMR 216 MERIT
, Paris.
Lysaniuk, B. and Tabeaud, B. (2015). Les santés vulnérables des Suds.
L’Espace Géographique
, 14, 229
–
244.
Magrin, G. and Ninot, O. (2020). Transitions et développement en Afrique : Un continent d’incertitudes.
Bulletin de l’Association de Géographes Français
, 2020–4, 395–411.
Magrin, G. and Thibaud, B. (2020). L’Anthropocène sous les tropiques : Tropicalité et développement à l’heure des changements globaux.
Belgeo
, 3 [Online]. Available at:
http://journals.openedition.org/belgeo/42708
[Accessed 5 October 2021].
Magrin, G., Chauvin, E., Lavie, E., Perrier-Bruslé, L., Redon, M. (2015a). Introduction. Les ressources, enjeux géographiques d’un objet pluriel. In
Ressources mondialisées. Essais de géographie politique
, Redon, M., Magrin, G., Chauvin, E., Lavie, E., Perrier-Bruslé, L. (eds). Publications de la Sorbonne, Paris.
Magrin, G., Mesclier, E., Piveteau, A. (2015b). Quand les Suds investissent dans les Suds : Un basculement aux contours encore indistincts. Introduction au dossier.
Autrepart
, 76(4), 203–228 [Online]. Available at:
https://horizon.documentation.ird.fr/exl-doc/pleins_textes/divers19-12/010069035.pdf
[Accessed 5 October 2021].
Meztger, P. and Peyroux, É. (2016). Comment la résilience s’impose à la pensée et à l’action : Usage rhétorique et effets politiques dans la planification urbaine à Johannesburg et la gestion des risques au Rímac (Lima).
XXXIIèmes Journées ATM de LILLE. Catastrophes, vulnérabilités et résiliences dans les pays en développement
, Lille.
Ninot, O. and Peyroux, É. (2018). Révolution numérique et développement en Afrique : Une trajectoire singulière.
Questions Internationales
, 90.
Ogé, F. (2014). L’environnement comme nouveau facteur d’incompréhension et de tension entre les cultures. Communication au “séminaire central”, UMR Prodig, Paris.
Ogé, F. (2016). La résurgence des biens communs : Passerelles pour articuler environnement et développement ? Communication au “séminaire central”, UMR Prodig, Paris.
Padovani, F. and Lysaniuk, B. (2019).
Les gestions des transitions. Anticiper, subir, réagir, planifier.
L’Harmattan, Paris.
Peyroux, É., Scott, D., Baud, I., Jameson, S. (2014). Spatial knowledge management and participatory governance: Rethinking the trajectories of urban, socio-economic and environmental change and the politics of “sustainability” in Southern cities, Final analytical framework. Report, Chance2Sustain EADI.
Piveteau, A., Rougier, E., Nicet-Chenaf, D. (eds) (2013).
Emergences capitalistes aux Suds
. Karthala, Paris.
Raffestin, C. (1980).
Pour une géographie du pouvoi
. Litec, Paris.
Raimond, C., Sylvestre, F., Zakinet, D., Abderamane, M. (eds) (2019).
Le Tchad des Lacs. Les zones humides sahéliennes au défi du changement global
. IRD Editions, Paris.
Raimond, C., Mbagogo, A., Madjigoto, R., Zakinet, D. (2020). Le lac Fitri (Tchad) face à la montée des insécurités. Repenser la gouvernance d’une zone humide autour d’un pouvoir local fort. In
Conflits et violences dans le bassin du lac Tchad
, Chauvin, E., Baroin, C., Seignobos, C. (eds). IRD Editions, Paris.
Rakoto Ramiarantsoa, H., Blanc-Pamard, C., Pinton, F. (2012).
Géopolitique et environnement. Les leçons de l’expérience malgache
. IRD Editions, Paris.
Reghezza-Zit, M. and Rufat, S. (eds) (2015).
Resilience Imperative: Uncertainty, Risks and Disasters
. ISTE Press, London, and Elsevier, Oxford.
Ribardière, A. (2017). Du Oaxaca à la ville de Mexico : L’accès aux ressources urbaines.
EchoGéo
, 40 [Online]. Available at:
http://journals.openedition.org/echogeo/14961
[Accessed 29 September 2021].
Ribardière, A., Bonerandi-Richard, E., Martin, M., Merchez, L. (2014). La pauvreté dans l’espace européen : Grilles de lecture. In
La pauvreté en Europe. Une approche géographique
, Bonerandi-Richard, E. and Boulineau, E. (eds). Presses Universitaires de Rennes, Rennes.
Rist, G. (2007).
Le développement. Histoire d’une croyance occidentale.
Presses de Sciences Po, Paris.
Rostow, W.W. (1962).
Les étapes de la croissance économique
. Le Seuil, Paris.
Sierra, A. (2020). Risque. Histoire du concept. In
Dictionnaire critique de l’Anthropocène
, Cynorhodon (ed.). CNRS, Paris.
Smouts, M.C. (ed.) (2005).
Le développement durable : Les termes du débat
. Armand Colin, Paris.
Stock, M., Volvey, A., Clément, V. (2021). Conclusion générale. In
Mouvements de géographie. Une science sociale au tournant
, Clément, V., Stock, M., Volvey, A. (eds). Presses Universitaires de Rennes, Rennes.
Swilling, M. and Annecke, E. (2012).
Just Transitions: Explorations of Sustainability in an Unfair World
. Juta, Cape Town and United Nations University Press, Tokyo.
Theys, J. (2014). Le développement durable face à sa crise : Un concept menacé, sous-exploité ou dépassé ?
Développement durable et territoires
, 5(1) [Online]. Available at:
http://journals.openedition.org/developpementdurable/10196
[Accessed 24 September 2021].
Tsayem-Demase, M. (2011).
Géopolitique du développement durable
. Presses universitaires de Rennes, Rennes.
Valeagas, F. (2020). Transition. Ecologie. In
Dictionnaire critique de l’Anthropocène
, Cynorhodon (ed.). CNRS, Paris.
Volvey, A., Stock, M., Calbérac, Y. (2021). Spatial turn, tournant spatial, turnant géographique. In
Mouvements de géographie. Une science sociale au tournant
, Clément, V., Stock, M., Volvey, A. (eds). Presses Universitaires de Rennes, Rennes.
Ziai, A. (2013). The discourse of “development” and why the concept should be abandoned.
Development in Practice
, 23, 123–136.
Ziai, A. (2015). Post-development: Premature burials and haunting ghosts.
Development and Change
, 46(4), 833–853.
Note
Introduction written by Élisabeth PEYROUX, Christine RAIMOND, Vincent VIEL and Émilie LAVIE.
