Jesse Ribot's guest appearances

Jesse Ribot

New Security Broadcast

In Common

Alice Hill

Kai Whiting

Sylvia Earle

Kate Gilmore

John Scanlon

Aaron Wolf

Edward Carr

Valerie Hudson

Alice Gorman

Margaret Palmer

Michael Cox

John Parker

Sam Huston

Rob Kaplan

Jean Wiener

OwlTail

In this episode, Michael speaks with Jesse Ribot, Professor at the School of International Service at American University. Jesse is a human geographer who studies environmental justice and rural wellbeing. They discuss several aspects of Jesse’s research, including his foundational work on the theory of access, which he developed with Nancy Peluso. This theory broadens the traditional framing of environmental property rights to consider a broad suite of social factors, such as market access and access to technology and capital, that enable or limit access to the environment and the benefits that come with this access. Michael and Jesse also talk about Jesse’s contributions to understanding climate change and climate risk. Here Jesse and his co-authors question the apolitical attribution of climate risk solely to the most proximate physical events such as hurricanes. Echoing Amartya Sen’s work on famine and entitlements, Jesse argues that this framing avoids the underlying dynamics of inequality that lead some to be more vulnerable to such events than others. This work continues a thread in Jesse’s research of unpacking concepts that have taken on a veneer of technicality, and reminding us that we cannot avoid asking about social inequality and the politics involved in addressing the underlying drivers of our environmental problems.   Jesse’s website: https://www.jesseribot.com/  References: Giridharadas, A. 2018. Winners take all: the elite charade of changing the world. Alfred A. Knopf. Kashwan, P., and J. Ribot. 2021. Violent silence: the erasure of history and justice in global climate policy. Current history 120(829):326–331. Lahsen, M., and J. Ribot. 2022. Politics of attributing extreme events and disasters to climate change. Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Climate change 13(1). Peluso, N. L., and J. Ribot. 2020. Postscript: A Theory of Access Revisited. Society &amp; natural resources 33(2):300–306. Ribot, J. C. 1998. Theorizing access: Forest profits along Senegal’s charcoal commodity chain. Development and change 29(2):307–341. Ribot, J. C., and N. L. Peluso. 2009. A theory of access. Rural sociology 68(2):153–181. Hidden Brain podcast interview with Eitan Hersh that Michael mentions: https://hiddenbrain.org/podcast/passion-isnt-enough/

In this episode, Michael speaks with Jesse Ribot, Professor at the School of International Service at American University. Jesse is a human geographer who studies environmental justice and rural wellbeing. They discuss several aspects of Jesse’s research, including his foundational work on the theory of access, which he developed with Nancy Peluso. This theory broadens the traditional framing of environmental property rights to consider a broad suite of social factors, such as market access and access to technology and capital, that enable or limit access to the environment and the benefits that come with this access. Michael and Jesse also talk about Jesse’s contributions to understanding climate change and climate risk. Here Jesse and his co-authors question the apolitical attribution of climate risk solely to the most proximate physical events such as hurricanes. Echoing Amartya Sen’s work on famine and entitlements, Jesse argues that this framing avoids the underlying dynamics of inequality that lead some to be more vulnerable to such events than others. This work continues a thread in Jesse’s research of unpacking concepts that have taken on a veneer of technicality, and reminding us that we cannot avoid asking about social inequality and the politics involved in addressing the underlying drivers of our environmental problems. Jesse’s website: <a href="https://www.jesseribot.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.jesseribot.com/</a> References: Giridharadas, A. 2018. Winners take all: the elite charade of changing the world. Alfred A. Knopf. Kashwan, P., and J. Ribot. 2021. Violent silence: the erasure of history and justice in global climate policy. Current history 120(829):326–331. Lahsen, M., and J. Ribot. 2022. Politics of attributing extreme events and disasters to climate change. Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Climate change 13(1). Peluso, N. L., and J. Ribot. 2020. Postscript: A Theory of Access Revisited. Society &amp; natural resources 33(2):300–306. Ribot, J. C. 1998. Theorizing access: Forest profits along Senegal’s charcoal commodity chain. Development and change 29(2):307–341. Ribot, J. C., and N. L. Peluso. 2009. A theory of access. Rural sociology 68(2):153–181. Hidden Brain podcast interview with Eitan Hersh that Michael mentions: <a href="https://hiddenbrain.org/podcast/passion-isnt-enough/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://hiddenbrain.org/podcast/passion-isnt-enough/</a>

099: The politics of environmental access and risk with Jesse Ribot

In a research project spanning more than two dozen case studies on environmental governance in 13 sub-Saharan African countries, Jesse Ribot, professor at the University of Illinois, and colleagues found that while many forest management projects claimed to be working with communities, they were in fact undermining local democracy in various ways.For example, Ribot says in this week’s episode of “Backdraft” that REDD, REDD-readiness, and other forest governance projects often circumvented locally elected officials for the sake of convenience and in response to pressure for quantifiable results. The workarounds were done “almost systematically, and not in ways that were subtle.”Why does this matter? Local democratic processes are “the nursery of democracy,” says Ribot. “People learn democratic process in local democracy and they go other places within their country and up the hierarchy.” When you have a system of decision-making that is accountable to the people, you have greater equity and stronger outcomes for the population.“Legitimacy follows power,” says Ribot, “and if you’re a project and you recognize a local actor as your interlocutor, your local representative, you’re empowering them, and that legitimates them.” Similarly, when development interventions ignore locally elected leaders, they delegitimize them.Where communities had more than one authority with overlapping responsibilities – e.g., elected local government, customary chiefs, and administrators from central government – development practitioners often chose to work with one of the traditional or centralized authorities over the democratically elected local government. One reason for this was that practitioners operated on the assumption that the customary chief spoke for the people. Digging deeper, Ribot and his colleagues found that while the customary chief often did speak for the people, their opinions were rarely accurately represented. The democratically elected local government was able to more effectively reflect the interests of the people.Ultimately, regardless of the pressure to produce results that may follow climate mitigation and adaptation programs, Ribot says the process matters.Rather than the climate event itself, it’s the vulnerability of a community that causes a catastrophe, says Ribot. Often people are not vulnerable to climate events because they lack adaptive capacity, but because of overwhelmed, poor, or exploitive governance. Undermining what democratic governance there is, therefore, is unlikely to produce positive results.The “Backdraft” podcast series is hosted and co-produced by Lauren Herzer Risi and Sean Peoples, a freelance multimedia producer based in Washington, DC.Friday Podcasts are also available for download on iTunes and Google Play.

In a research project spanning more than two dozen case studies on environmental governance in 13 sub-Saharan African countries, Jesse Ribot, professor at the University of Illinois, and colleagues found that while many forest management projects claimed to be working with communities, they were in fact undermining local democracy in various ways. For example, Ribot says in this week’s episode of “Backdraft” that REDD, REDD-readiness, and other forest governance projects often circumvented locally elected officials for the sake of convenience and in response to pressure for quantifiable results. The workarounds were done “almost systematically, and not in ways that were subtle.” Why does this matter? Local democratic processes are “the nursery of democracy,” says Ribot. “People learn democratic process in local democracy and they go other places within their country and up the hierarchy.” When you have a system of decision-making that is accountable to the people, you have greater equity and stronger outcomes for the population. “Legitimacy follows power,” says Ribot, “and if you’re a project and you recognize a local actor as your interlocutor, your local representative, you’re empowering them, and that legitimates them.” Similarly, when development interventions ignore locally elected leaders, they delegitimize them. Where communities had more than one authority with overlapping responsibilities – e.g., elected local government, customary chiefs, and administrators from central government – development practitioners often chose to work with one of the traditional or centralized authorities over the democratically elected local government. One reason for this was that practitioners operated on the assumption that the customary chief spoke for the people. Digging deeper, Ribot and his colleagues found that while the customary chief often did speak for the people, their opinions were rarely accurately represented. The democratically elected local government was able to more effectively reflect the interests of the people. Ultimately, regardless of the pressure to produce results that may follow climate mitigation and adaptation programs, Ribot says the process matters. Rather than the climate event itself, it’s the vulnerability of a community that causes a catastrophe, says Ribot. Often people are not vulnerable to climate events because they lack adaptive capacity, but because of overwhelmed, poor, or exploitive governance. Undermining what democratic governance there is, therefore, is unlikely to produce positive results. The “Backdraft” podcast series is hosted and co-produced by Lauren Herzer Risi and Sean Peoples, a freelance multimedia producer based in Washington, DC. Friday Podcasts are also available for download on iTunes and Google Play.

Backdraft #6: Jesse Ribot on Why It’s So Important for Climate Interventions to Work Through Local Democracy