Posts in Audio
The Political Economy of Climate Justice: Tetravaluation all the Way Down
 

Fred Gale discussed the role of values in a divided polity, and considered ‘tetravaluation’, a linking of four value systems, as important in achieving better political, and sustainable, outcomes. At the end of the discussion, participants explored questions about individual awareness-raising, as opposed to larger structural reform. Structural problems are fundamental to address, but it was noted that structures themselves are reproduced by individual subjectivities.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
In Dubio Pro Natura as a Principle in Climate Litigation: Future and Challenges
 

Hari Prasetiyo discussed the In Dubio Pro Natura principle and climate litigation from an Indonesian perspective, stating that in the future a principle that legal doubt should be resolved to protect nature may be used in Indonesian courts.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
Can “Governing Through Goals” Advance Climate Justice or International Environmental Governance?
 

Michelle Lim discussed governing through goals and introduced criteria for effective goal-setting. This was applied to the examples of the Paris Agreement, the Sustainable Development Goals and the Sendai Framework. Goals have motivational and operative value and are contrasted with rules, but both are needed for effective governance.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
Is there a future for negligence in Australian climate change litigation?
 

Timothy Baxter discussed the future of negligence in climate litigation, exploring the possibility of changing the elements of negligence for negligence concerning climate impacts. This involved a discussion of the Interpretive Theory of Negligence Law.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
Imagining Justice Through Restoration: International Law In An Era of Ecological Restoration
 

Afshin Akhtar-Khavari spoke about ecological restoration, and new ways of imagining the social contract as a natural contract, moving away from assumptions about objectivity and towards an ecological world-view.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
Factors shaping enablement of climate-just adaptation by local governments and NGOS in Australia
 

Jason Byrne explained how local governments and non-governmental organizations can enable climate-just adaptation with a focus on social innovation and risk framing to enhance responses to climate change.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
Climate Justice through the Courts?
 

Margaretha Wewerinke-Singh’s remarks (read by Jacqueline peel) touched on climate litigation and human rights in the South Pacific, and how there needs to be a better understanding of how climate litigation could promote climate justice in the South Pacific. A specific climate treaty for the South Pacific region that is being developed was also discussed, and how a focus of this treaty will be access to justice.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
Democracy is a prerequisite for climate action and climate justice, but context matters
 

Eve Croeser explored the implications of geoengineering for democracy, and how the normalisation of Solar Radiation Management reflects a failure of our current form of liberal democracy. Surely considering an alternative economic governance system would be a less radical alternative than ‘hacking the planet.’

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
How Will Climate Change Affect the Welfare State? A Study of Burden Sharing in Australia
 

Peter Christoff used Australia as a case study considering how national equity issues may play out and the possible compounding effects, noting that there is a poor longer term prognosis for climate/equity in Australia.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
Do Equity Debates Function as an Enabler to Climate Action or a Barrier?
 

Kate Dooley (University of Melbourne) compared studies quantifying different equity approaches, noting the lack of consistency amongst their findings. The comparison raises questions around the role of science when it comes to determining fairness and informing these highly political processes.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
Climate Change Criminals and Climate Justice
 

Rob White discussed conceptualising polluting corporations as climate criminals, and argued that a green criminological perspective allows for radical structural change moving forward

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
Human Rights Approaches To Climate Change – Can They Live Up To Their Potential?
 

Bridget Lewis (Queensland University of Technology) discussed the limitations of using human rights law to respond to climate change, in order to show the potential of a human rights approach. This involved a discussion of human rights being used at both an international and domestic setting in order to protect the rights of those affected by climate change.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
People on the Move
 

Guy Goodwin-Gill (University of New South Wales) raised options for protecting the human rights of refugees and emphasised the need for international cooperation when dealing with migration issues. Countries do not always act in accordance with this international regime and one of the ways this may be addressed is though allowing States to be held criminally liable for their treatment of refugees, reflecting that everyone has the right to have a remedy for wrongs done, and to be treated as an equal.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
Eco-Civilization & International Environmental Law
 

Ben Boer (University of Sydney & Wuhan University) discussed ecological civilization, why it is important in China, and what implications the concept of ecological civilisation has for addressing climate change, both in China and Australia.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
A Global Environmental Constitution and the Achievement of Socio-Ecological Justice in the Anthropocene
 

Louis Kotzé (North-West University) focused particularly on one of the ways to change international environmental law, through discussion of a ‘global constitution’, involving legal reform based on constitutional legal rules, but without a global state. Such reform could occur in the same manner as human rights law, with states as the subjects, and work to entrench legal environmental norms.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
What is the Point of International Environmental Law in the Anthropocene?
 

Tim Stephens presented on the relationship between international environmental law and the Anthropocene. The relation between the two has taken different forms in a pre-Anthropocene era, and in the present day, and provides challenges and opportunities for just and effective outcomes moving into the future.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
The Use and Misuse of Climate Science
 

David Coady (University of Tasmania) addressed Two epistemic errors of many climate change sceptics. The first is the failure to recognise truth, due to the pursuit of belief or avoidance of error. The second is an independence principle, mistakenly requiring scientific conclusions to be acquired with a high degree of independence of each other. Climate sceptics are often characterised as anti-science, but rather may have a misunderstanding of science.

 
 

Richard Corry (University of Tasmania) discussed attributing responsibility for extreme weather events. In answering whether climate change caused a specific event, we may ask whether it ‘could not’ or ‘would not’ have happened without climate change. Both tests are unsatisfactory to answer the causal question. If we measure how much of a contribution the cause made, the results may show climate change as a significant cause of events. Three discussants shared their responses to the presentations.

 
 

Discussion:

Sivan Kartha (Stockholm Environment Institute) highlighted the particular aspect of testimony. There may need to be better differentiation between scientific conclusions and normative judgements. James Risbey noted there is an inbuilt conservatism in science and a reluctance to talk about climate change as an alarming prospect. Mel Fitzpatrick addressed the silencing of scientists. Part of the problem is the well-funded misinformation campaign and attacks on climate scientists.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
Acceptable Pollution and Unacceptable Pollution: Do Burdened Societies Owe Strong Climate Obligations to their Citizens?
 

Thierry Ngosso (University of St. Gallen, Switzerland) addressed the question Acceptable Pollution and Unacceptable Pollution: Do Burdened Societies Owe Strong Climate Obligations to their Citizens?, considering both the role of luxury and subsistence emissions, as well as what a burdened society is, and how these countries can demonstrate they are willing to become a well-ordered society and to reduce emissions. A burdened society may be defined as one that is willing to become a well-ordered society, but are not able to achieve this objective independently, as they are trapped by what can be considered as historic burdens, such as weak economic structures. The use of ‘burdened society’ terminology versus ‘developing’ terminology is important, as it is less paternalistic, and can put more weight on the individual, rather than the state. In the area of climate justice, obligations at the global level can be determined by calculating emissions, and whether the relevant emissions are luxurious emissions or subsistence emissions. Some argue that it would be unfair for wealthy countries to continue to emit luxury emissions while other countries remain poor. This is not to say that burdened societies have no obligation at all, just that they have a strong obligation to improve the lives of their own people, which often requires some level of emissions. At the same time, some emissions in burdened societies are luxury emissions, and burdened societies should have a strong climate obligation to reduce their own luxury emissions. Additionally, if burdened societies do not do whatever they can to reduce emissions, this can ultimately serve as a barrier to climate justice. A question arises as to whether emissions are luxurious or not. One way to determine this is to see which emissions are acceptable, as people need them to live a reasonable life, and which are not needed and thus unacceptable. However, using this acceptable and unacceptable distinction is more of a political than a moral decision, and it is known that most political communities have highly divided ideas. Alternatively, the simple distinction could be used of emissions that either can or cannot be avoided to live. This is less likely to be politically influenced and emphasises individual responsibility. Burdened societies should do what they can do to reduce luxury emissions. However, because of their relatively weak situation, they should be helped by well-ordered countries. This help should, in turn, be based on the burdened society seeking to become a more well-ordered society, which can be demonstrated in many ways. For example, many burdened societies rely heavily on natural resources. Reigning in natural resource use, increasing taxes, and becoming more vigilant in how taxes are used can have economic benefits while changing relationship between rulers and citizens, and making decision-making more accountable.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
How to do Justice to Each Other? Reconfiguring the Notion of Justice in Climate Change Discourse.
 

Karin Hutflotz (Munich School of Philosophy) addressed How to do Justice to Each Other? Reconfiguring the Notion of Justice in Climate Change Discourse. To do justice to each other, people must work towards an intersubjective concept of justice. Currently notions of climate justice are often based on the idea of debtors and creditors. It is extremely difficult to determine who is the debtor in climate change issues, and yet people still hold on to this idea. It is difficult or even impossible to figure out costs, now or in the future. Additionally, justice is often described as abstract concepts and does not take into account social reality. Therefore, an intersubjective concept of justice should be worked towards. To work towards an intersubjective concept of justice, people could employ a 3-step program that involves sharing experiences, learning to listen to others, and asking fundamental questions in groups of high diversity, whilst meeting as equals. This would give everyone the opportunity to be a part of the discussion and hear all viewpoints. When working towards an intersubjective concept of justice, conflicts could be used as a resource. This could be the main resource of understanding and community building, and it would force people to focus on real values, and a common ground for basic human rights. It would not be necessary for people to agree on details or the content of values, but it is necessary to have a task or problem in common, to pursue a common goal, and to recognise people as equals and individuals at the same time. This is an ongoing recognition process.

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.

 
Laudato Si: A Case for Action or Wasted Opportunity?
 

Neil Ormerod, Australian Catholic University

Neil spoke on the topic Laudato Si: A Case for Action or Wasted Opportunity? In Laudato Si Pope Francis is considering how to re-orientate environmental thinking as a non-negotiable element of Christian life. By doing so the Pope rejects one interpretation of Genisis 1:28 and seeks to prompt a change in lifestyles away from consumerism and the techno-economic paradigm. It is clear that in Laudato Si the Pope wants to have a direct impact not only on the Catholic Church but also more broadly.  However, a recent National Church Life Survey shows that a large number of Catholics are not familiar with Laudato Si.  Concluding that while the sleeping giant of the church may have arisen, more is needed for a fuller awakening on the issue.  Participants raised a number of questions including, whether Laudato Si has influenced government thinking, a number of questions about a just transition in light of cross border effects, and broader questions including how to communicate all of these issues and stories to a wider audience. 

 

This talk was held at:

Imagining a Different Future

Climate Justice Conference

The University of Tasmania with the support of the University of Utrecht Ethics Institute hosted a multidisciplinary conference examining the barriers to responding to climate change, implementing climate justice, and proposing ways forward. Among the keynote speakers were Law Faculty Professors Jan McDonald and Ben Richardson. The Law Faculty's Dr Peter Lawrence co-convened the conference with Jan Linehan. The conference took place in Hobart from 8-9 Feb 2018.

Despite the Paris Agreement, there are real concerns the prevailing neoliberal economic and political model, particularly with the move to more insular, nationalistic, fragile politics, cannot respond effectively to climate change and excludes key considerations such as ethics and justice. Videos and Podcasts from the conference are available on the Knowledge Hub.