Cette lecture ethnocritique d'« À une passante » de Baudelaire vise à prendre en compte la culture du poème en réinscrivant cette passante dans une dynamique anthropologique du passage (celui du « grand deuil ») et en établissant une équivalence symbolique entre la « jambe de statue » et la boiterie. Alliant une poétique du texte et une ethnologie du symbolique, cet article fait l'hypothèse générale que le poème obéit à des réglages culturels bien particuliers, qui mettent l'accent sur des logiques de la traversée rituelle et de la mobilité entravée.
Communication en libre accès. Document disponible en ligne : http://isee2014.yourhost.is/images/abstracts.pdf ; International audience ; Madagascar is very often presented under the contradiction of being one of the most biodiverse country, but also one of the poorest economies of the world. A contradiction which is also the base of the dominant discourse of the environment and development aid, based on the paradigm of the ecological modernisation (Hajer, 1996) or modernisation (Robbins, 2004). This paradigm allows to link environment and economy instead of opposing them. Contrasting with a radical ecological approach which would need deep social and institutional changes, ecological modernisation is a more nuanced political discourse which does not put into question capitalism, but integrate environmental questions like pollution into the economic market. The economic development is said to be a condition of the sustainable protection of the environment, thanks to fiscal rules and introduction of proper technologies. Conversely, taking account of the environment would benefit to economy. The mining industry draws upon this paradigm and the contradiction of biodiversity wealth and economical poverty. For instance in Madagascar, mining are a very interesting proposal for the economic development of the country. The two biggest mining industries, Rio Tinto and Sherrit, which represents a direct forest investment of 5 billion US$ representing 65% of 2008 PIB. It should provide 18% of tax revenues by 2010 (Pelon, 2010). Yet, it also represents an important risk regarding social and environmental issue, with potential irreversible impacts. Conforming to international rules, the two mining industries of Madagascar are developing offset programs, to compensate the negative impacts by protecting forests in another threatened place. How are biodiversity offsets schemes developed? What is the governance of these projects? What are the controversies around these projects? Sociological methodology (interviews, analysis of ...
Communication en libre accès. Document disponible en ligne : http://isee2014.yourhost.is/images/abstracts.pdf ; International audience ; Madagascar is very often presented under the contradiction of being one of the most biodiverse country, but also one of the poorest economies of the world. A contradiction which is also the base of the dominant discourse of the environment and development aid, based on the paradigm of the ecological modernisation (Hajer, 1996) or modernisation (Robbins, 2004). This paradigm allows to link environment and economy instead of opposing them. Contrasting with a radical ecological approach which would need deep social and institutional changes, ecological modernisation is a more nuanced political discourse which does not put into question capitalism, but integrate environmental questions like pollution into the economic market. The economic development is said to be a condition of the sustainable protection of the environment, thanks to fiscal rules and introduction of proper technologies. Conversely, taking account of the environment would benefit to economy. The mining industry draws upon this paradigm and the contradiction of biodiversity wealth and economical poverty. For instance in Madagascar, mining are a very interesting proposal for the economic development of the country. The two biggest mining industries, Rio Tinto and Sherrit, which represents a direct forest investment of 5 billion US$ representing 65% of 2008 PIB. It should provide 18% of tax revenues by 2010 (Pelon, 2010). Yet, it also represents an important risk regarding social and environmental issue, with potential irreversible impacts. Conforming to international rules, the two mining industries of Madagascar are developing offset programs, to compensate the negative impacts by protecting forests in another threatened place. How are biodiversity offsets schemes developed? What is the governance of these projects? What are the controversies around these projects? Sociological methodology (interviews, analysis of literature and observation) will be used to describe those two case studies. This presentation aims at analysing the compromise realized by the mining industry of Madagascar, the actors involved in the construction of discourse, and particularly, of the scientific justification of offsets. (Résumé d'auteur)
Communication en libre accès. Document disponible en ligne : http://isee2014.yourhost.is/images/abstracts.pdf ; International audience ; Madagascar is very often presented under the contradiction of being one of the most biodiverse country, but also one of the poorest economies of the world. A contradiction which is also the base of the dominant discourse of the environment and development aid, based on the paradigm of the ecological modernisation (Hajer, 1996) or modernisation (Robbins, 2004). This paradigm allows to link environment and economy instead of opposing them. Contrasting with a radical ecological approach which would need deep social and institutional changes, ecological modernisation is a more nuanced political discourse which does not put into question capitalism, but integrate environmental questions like pollution into the economic market. The economic development is said to be a condition of the sustainable protection of the environment, thanks to fiscal rules and introduction of proper technologies. Conversely, taking account of the environment would benefit to economy. The mining industry draws upon this paradigm and the contradiction of biodiversity wealth and economical poverty. For instance in Madagascar, mining are a very interesting proposal for the economic development of the country. The two biggest mining industries, Rio Tinto and Sherrit, which represents a direct forest investment of 5 billion US$ representing 65% of 2008 PIB. It should provide 18% of tax revenues by 2010 (Pelon, 2010). Yet, it also represents an important risk regarding social and environmental issue, with potential irreversible impacts. Conforming to international rules, the two mining industries of Madagascar are developing offset programs, to compensate the negative impacts by protecting forests in another threatened place. How are biodiversity offsets schemes developed? What is the governance of these projects? What are the controversies around these projects? Sociological methodology (interviews, analysis of literature and observation) will be used to describe those two case studies. This presentation aims at analysing the compromise realized by the mining industry of Madagascar, the actors involved in the construction of discourse, and particularly, of the scientific justification of offsets. (Résumé d'auteur)
Communication en libre accès. Document disponible en ligne : http://isee2014.yourhost.is/images/abstracts.pdf ; International audience ; Madagascar is very often presented under the contradiction of being one of the most biodiverse country, but also one of the poorest economies of the world. A contradiction which is also the base of the dominant discourse of the environment and development aid, based on the paradigm of the ecological modernisation (Hajer, 1996) or modernisation (Robbins, 2004). This paradigm allows to link environment and economy instead of opposing them. Contrasting with a radical ecological approach which would need deep social and institutional changes, ecological modernisation is a more nuanced political discourse which does not put into question capitalism, but integrate environmental questions like pollution into the economic market. The economic development is said to be a condition of the sustainable protection of the environment, thanks to fiscal rules and introduction of proper technologies. Conversely, taking account of the environment would benefit to economy. The mining industry draws upon this paradigm and the contradiction of biodiversity wealth and economical poverty. For instance in Madagascar, mining are a very interesting proposal for the economic development of the country. The two biggest mining industries, Rio Tinto and Sherrit, which represents a direct forest investment of 5 billion US$ representing 65% of 2008 PIB. It should provide 18% of tax revenues by 2010 (Pelon, 2010). Yet, it also represents an important risk regarding social and environmental issue, with potential irreversible impacts. Conforming to international rules, the two mining industries of Madagascar are developing offset programs, to compensate the negative impacts by protecting forests in another threatened place. How are biodiversity offsets schemes developed? What is the governance of these projects? What are the controversies around these projects? Sociological methodology (interviews, analysis of literature and observation) will be used to describe those two case studies. This presentation aims at analysing the compromise realized by the mining industry of Madagascar, the actors involved in the construction of discourse, and particularly, of the scientific justification of offsets. (Résumé d'auteur)
Communication en libre accès. Document disponible en ligne : http://isee2014.yourhost.is/images/abstracts.pdf ; International audience ; Madagascar is very often presented under the contradiction of being one of the most biodiverse country, but also one of the poorest economies of the world. A contradiction which is also the base of the dominant discourse of the environment and development aid, based on the paradigm of the ecological modernisation (Hajer, 1996) or modernisation (Robbins, 2004). This paradigm allows to link environment and economy instead of opposing them. Contrasting with a radical ecological approach which would need deep social and institutional changes, ecological modernisation is a more nuanced political discourse which does not put into question capitalism, but integrate environmental questions like pollution into the economic market. The economic development is said to be a condition of the sustainable protection of the environment, thanks to fiscal rules and introduction of proper technologies. Conversely, taking account of the environment would benefit to economy. The mining industry draws upon this paradigm and the contradiction of biodiversity wealth and economical poverty. For instance in Madagascar, mining are a very interesting proposal for the economic development of the country. The two biggest mining industries, Rio Tinto and Sherrit, which represents a direct forest investment of 5 billion US$ representing 65% of 2008 PIB. It should provide 18% of tax revenues by 2010 (Pelon, 2010). Yet, it also represents an important risk regarding social and environmental issue, with potential irreversible impacts. Conforming to international rules, the two mining industries of Madagascar are developing offset programs, to compensate the negative impacts by protecting forests in another threatened place. How are biodiversity offsets schemes developed? What is the governance of these projects? What are the controversies around these projects? Sociological methodology (interviews, analysis of literature and observation) will be used to describe those two case studies. This presentation aims at analysing the compromise realized by the mining industry of Madagascar, the actors involved in the construction of discourse, and particularly, of the scientific justification of offsets. (Résumé d'auteur)
At both the international and national scale, since the 1990s, the international environmental community has been increasingly interested in market-based instruments (MBIs) as mechanisms for the provision of ecosystem services (OECD, 1993, 1995, 1997). In the biodiversity sector, "biodiversity offsets" (BOs) rapidly become one of the indispensible policy solutions in the response to the challenges of maintaining biodiversity. International organizations and conventions, think tanks, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and even private enterprises have incorporated the concept and promoted offset based instruments on a supranational scale. Today, BOs are an increasingly popular yet controversial tool in conservation even if biodiversity offset schemes are very diverse and heterogeneous. Their popularity lies in their potential to meet the objectives of biodiversity conservation and economic development in tandem; the controversy lies in the need to accept ecological losses in return for uncertain gains (Bull et al., 2013, 1). To understand the success of BOs schemes, the communication analyses, first, the success of BOs in global biodiversity arenas since the beginning of the 2000's and the policy entrepreneurs who introduced BO approach. Second, we discuss the multiple uses of BOs and their diverse institutional arrangements. Finally, we also propose an institutional framework that deals with challenges in the offset process in order to analyse opportunities and risks of BOs. (Texte intégral)
