Emerging countries in Southeast Asia are facing considerable challenges in addressing rising motorisation and its negative impact on air quality, traffic, energy security, liveability, and greenhouse gas emissions. Indeed, even as initial policies to address these issues are being agreed and implemented, current trends are incompatible with sustainable development and long-term climate change targets. This paper presents a comparative analysis of the approach and status of sustainable, low-carbon transport policy in ASEAN countries and identifies differences and similarities, with the aim of helping assessment of feasibility of future policies and informing future studies on policy innovations and cross-country learning. The methodology is based on the taxonomy of policy components developed by Howlett and Cashore, and our data on comprehensive country studies for Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam and interviews. We find that each country has a specific set of goals, objectives and targets that support sustainable transport, and, directly or indirectly, climate change mitigation. In terms of specific instruments and calibrations, which we analyse based on the Avoid-Shift-Improve approach, there are notable differences between the countries, for example in fuel economy policy.

Commons and food are experiencing a revival in recent years and yet the links between both are almost absent in academic and political discourses. Commons are often portrayed as historical and yet innovative governing mechanisms that can challenge the State-Market hegemony. On the other side, food is both a relevant agent of change and a major driver of planetary destruction, being thus cause and solution to multiple crises that affect humankind. Departing from the commodification of food as one root cause of the broken global food system, this text firstly situates and discusses the different schools of thought (or epistemologies) that have addressed the private/public, commodity/commons nature of goods in general, and then explores how those schools have considered food in particular. To do so, the author has defined five epistemologies, four academic (economic, legal, historical and political) and one non-academic (grassroots activists). The analysis highlights how those epistemologies have yielded incommensurable understandings and conflicting vocabularies, hence creating confusion in the socio-political realm and even rejection around the idea of food being considered as a commons. The economic epistemic regard has reigned over the others by applying an approach to commons, public and private goods that is theoretical, reductionist and ontological instead of phenomenological, therefore preventing or obscuring other scholarly or practical understanding of commons. When applied to food, the iron law of economics dictated that food, a private good based on rivalry and excludability, shall be better allocated through market mechanisms with absolute proprietary rights and valued as a pure commodity. This reductionist view collides with the plurality of meanings of food in different societies, civilisations and historical periods, as other schools of thought indicate. The author uses diverse epistemic tools to re-construct food as a commons, based on its essentiality to human beings and societies and the customary and contemporary praxis to produce, consume and govern food collectively through non-market mechanisms for more than 2000 centuries. As commoning has instituting power to create different political and legal frameworks, if food is valued differently the entire architecture of the global food system would change, as the grassroots activist school claims. Re-commoning food defies the legal and political scaffoldings that sustain the hegemony of market and state decision-makers over eaters and food producers and informs sustainable forms of food production (agro-ecology), new collective practices of governance (food democracies) and alternative policies to regain control over the food system (food sovereignty). Food as a commons is an agent of change with transformative power, no matter what economists say.

There is a large potential for cost-effective solutions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to improve the sustainability of the transport sector that is yet unexploited, in particular in the urban context. Considering the cost-effectiveness and the potential for co-benefits, it is hard to understand why energy gains and mitigation action in the transport sector is still lagging behind the potential. Particularly interesting is the fact that there is substantial difference among countries with relatively similar economic performances, such as the OECD countries in the development of their transport CO2 emission over the past thirty years despite the fact that these countries had relatively similar access to efficient technologies and vehicles. This study aims to apply some well established political science theories on the particular example of climate change mitigation in the transport sector in order to identify some of the factors that could help explain the variations in success of policies and strategies in this sector. The analysis suggests that institutional arrangements that contribute to consensus building in the political process provide a high level of political and policy stability which is vital to long-term changes in energy end-use sectors that rely on long-term investments. However, there is no direct correlation between institutional structures, e.g. corporatism and success in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the transport sector. Environmental objectives need to be built into the consensus-based policy structure before actual policy progress can be observed. This usually takes longer in consensus democracies than in politically more agile majoritarian policy environments, but the policy stability that builds on corporatist institutional structures is likely to experience changes over a longer-term, in this case to a shift towards low-carbon transport that endures.

REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) aims to achieve its purpose by working across multiple sectors and involving multi-level actors in reducing deforestation and forest degradation in tropical countries. By contrast, the European Union (EU) Action Plan on Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) and its Voluntary Partnership Agreements (VPAs) focus on forestry and functions at bilateral state level. The FLEGT Action Plan specifically aims to tackle illegal logging, legalise timber production and trade improve forest governance in countries exporting tropical timber to the EU. Since illegal logging is just one driver of deforestation and forest degeneration, and legalisation of logging does not necessarily reduce deforestation and forest degradation, the two instruments differ in scale and scope. However, by addressing the causes of deforestation and forest degradation and their underlying governance issues, the EU FLEGT and REDD+ share many functional linkages at higher levels of forest policy and forest governance. The contribution and participation of civil society organisations (CSOs) and other actors is imperative to both processes. Our study is based on a survey of key actors (national and international) in REDD+ and FLEGT VPA processes in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Our analysis was guided by the theoretical perspectives of the policy arrangement approach and examination of two specific dimensions of this approach, namely resources and rules of the game. This paper argues that participation of CSOs in both processes is crucial as it facilitates and nurtures the very much needed cooperation between other national and international actors. The paper also argues that participation of CSOs feeds valuable information and knowledge into REDD+ and FLEGT VPA processes, thus contributing to increased legitimacy, justice and transparency.

The measurement of discrimination in employment is a key variable in understanding dynamics in the nature of and change in ‘race relations’. Measuring such discrimination using ‘situation’ and ‘correspondence’ tests was influenced by John Rex’s sociological analyses, begun in in England in the 1960s, and replicated in Europe and America in later decades. This literature is reviewed, and the methodologies of testing for employment discrimination are discussed. Recent work in Britain and The Netherlands is considered in detail in the light of changing social structures, and the rise of Islamophobia. Manchester, apparently the city manifesting the most discrimination in Britain, is considered for a special case study, with a focus on one individual, a Muslim woman seeking intermediate level accountancy employment. Her vita was matched with that of a manifestly indigenous, white Briton. Submitted vitas (to 1,043 potential employers) indicated significant discrimination against the Muslim woman candidate. Results are discussed within the context of Manchester’s micro-sociology, and Muslim women’s employment progress in broader contexts, drawing on our work in Jordan and Palestine. We conclude with the critical realist comment that the “hidden racism” of employment discrimination shows that capitalist societies continue to be institutionally racist, and the failure to reward legitimate aspirations of minorities pushes ethnic minorities into a permanent precariat, with implications for social justice and social control, which denies minority efforts to “integrate” in society’s employment systems.

As the leader of the largest economy, President of the United States has substantive influence on addressing the global climate change problem. However, presidential election is often dominated by issues other than energy problems. This paper focuses on the on-going 2016 presidential election, examining the energy plans proposed by the leading Democrat and Republican candidates. Our data from the Iowa caucus survey in January 2016 suggests that voters are more concerned about terrorism and economic issues than environmental relative issues. We then compare the Democratic and Republican candidate’s view of American’s energy future, and evaluate their proposed renewable energy targets. We find that the view on renewable energy is polarized between Democratic and Republican candidates, while candidates from both parties agree on the need for energy efficiency. Results from our ordinal least squares regression models suggest that Democratic candidates have moderate to ambitious goals for developing solar and other renewable energy. The Republican candidates favor fossil fuel and they neglect to provide any plan for renewable energy. In addition, this trend of polarization has grown more significant when compared with the past three presidential elections. Our observation suggests that energy issues need to be discussed more to draw broader attention to salient issues of diversifying and decarbonizing the nation’s energy system.

As the world’s second largest economy, China ranks amount the world’s top nations when it comes to carbon emission, and therefore its attitude towards climate change is closely followed by all parties concerned. There have been few researches on the role of environmental governance in low-carbon city transformation process, especially the Chinese one. This paper analyses the role of government environmental regulation played in the low-carbon city transformation process by taking Shenzhen as the research object. One of the world's youngest super cities, it also happens to be the lowest carbon emission intensity city in China. Striving to explore green low-carbon development path for the whole country, Shenzhen provides practical experience for countries to cope with global climate change. However, its efforts to reduce the total carbon emissions failed, but it emphasized the carbon emission intensity, which is consistent with the international commitments made by the central government. China’s policy towards handling climate change relies on hierarchical governance arrangement. The strength of the NGOs in the country is weak and incomparable with the government’s, which has mastered most of the resources and is just a reality in China.