Triple-wins as pathways to transformation? A critical review

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

’Triple-wins’ has emerged as a powerful rhetorical device for instigating responses to linked climate-development challenges. By promising to deliver synergistic mitigation-adaptation-development outcomes via a single intervention, triple-win logic has proven immensely appealing to policymakers and researchers alike. Although heralded by its proponents as an enabler of transformational change towards desirable low-carbon and climate-resilient futures, emerging critiques suggest focus upon triple-wins detracts attention from pressing social questions pertinent to integrative efforts, including how trade-offs are deliberated, for whom wins and losses accrue, and who decides. Here, we review emerging critiques of triple-win rhetoric within climate-smart agriculture and climate compatible development, and explore its suitability as a device for enabling transformational change. We argue that triple-win rhetoric, as currently conceived, fails to engage with the social complexities inherent to the pursuit of integrated outcomes, as well as the underlying social conditions that perpetuate business-as-usual development. In response, we propose a more dynamic ‘pathways’ approach to triple-wins that foregrounds normative commitments to recognition, rights and justice in the pursuit of desirable climate-resilient futures.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)167-170
JournalGeoforum
Volume103
Early online date21 Dec 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2019

Fingerprint

climate
rhetoric
social factors
justice
agriculture
commitment

Cite this

@article{ec0a2fc027d04816b2b8bddd9a75ea5d,
title = "Triple-wins as pathways to transformation? A critical review",
abstract = "’Triple-wins’ has emerged as a powerful rhetorical device for instigating responses to linked climate-development challenges. By promising to deliver synergistic mitigation-adaptation-development outcomes via a single intervention, triple-win logic has proven immensely appealing to policymakers and researchers alike. Although heralded by its proponents as an enabler of transformational change towards desirable low-carbon and climate-resilient futures, emerging critiques suggest focus upon triple-wins detracts attention from pressing social questions pertinent to integrative efforts, including how trade-offs are deliberated, for whom wins and losses accrue, and who decides. Here, we review emerging critiques of triple-win rhetoric within climate-smart agriculture and climate compatible development, and explore its suitability as a device for enabling transformational change. We argue that triple-win rhetoric, as currently conceived, fails to engage with the social complexities inherent to the pursuit of integrated outcomes, as well as the underlying social conditions that perpetuate business-as-usual development. In response, we propose a more dynamic ‘pathways’ approach to triple-wins that foregrounds normative commitments to recognition, rights and justice in the pursuit of desirable climate-resilient futures.",
keywords = "Climate compatible development, Climate-resilient futures, Climate-smart agriculture, Pathways, Transformation, Triple-win",
author = "Ellis, {Neville R.} and Petra Tschakert",
year = "2019",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.12.006",
language = "English",
volume = "103",
pages = "167--170",
journal = "Geoforum",
issn = "0016-7185",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Triple-wins as pathways to transformation? A critical review. / Ellis, Neville R.; Tschakert, Petra.

In: Geoforum, Vol. 103, 07.2019, p. 167-170.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Triple-wins as pathways to transformation? A critical review

AU - Ellis, Neville R.

AU - Tschakert, Petra

PY - 2019/7

Y1 - 2019/7

N2 - ’Triple-wins’ has emerged as a powerful rhetorical device for instigating responses to linked climate-development challenges. By promising to deliver synergistic mitigation-adaptation-development outcomes via a single intervention, triple-win logic has proven immensely appealing to policymakers and researchers alike. Although heralded by its proponents as an enabler of transformational change towards desirable low-carbon and climate-resilient futures, emerging critiques suggest focus upon triple-wins detracts attention from pressing social questions pertinent to integrative efforts, including how trade-offs are deliberated, for whom wins and losses accrue, and who decides. Here, we review emerging critiques of triple-win rhetoric within climate-smart agriculture and climate compatible development, and explore its suitability as a device for enabling transformational change. We argue that triple-win rhetoric, as currently conceived, fails to engage with the social complexities inherent to the pursuit of integrated outcomes, as well as the underlying social conditions that perpetuate business-as-usual development. In response, we propose a more dynamic ‘pathways’ approach to triple-wins that foregrounds normative commitments to recognition, rights and justice in the pursuit of desirable climate-resilient futures.

AB - ’Triple-wins’ has emerged as a powerful rhetorical device for instigating responses to linked climate-development challenges. By promising to deliver synergistic mitigation-adaptation-development outcomes via a single intervention, triple-win logic has proven immensely appealing to policymakers and researchers alike. Although heralded by its proponents as an enabler of transformational change towards desirable low-carbon and climate-resilient futures, emerging critiques suggest focus upon triple-wins detracts attention from pressing social questions pertinent to integrative efforts, including how trade-offs are deliberated, for whom wins and losses accrue, and who decides. Here, we review emerging critiques of triple-win rhetoric within climate-smart agriculture and climate compatible development, and explore its suitability as a device for enabling transformational change. We argue that triple-win rhetoric, as currently conceived, fails to engage with the social complexities inherent to the pursuit of integrated outcomes, as well as the underlying social conditions that perpetuate business-as-usual development. In response, we propose a more dynamic ‘pathways’ approach to triple-wins that foregrounds normative commitments to recognition, rights and justice in the pursuit of desirable climate-resilient futures.

KW - Climate compatible development

KW - Climate-resilient futures

KW - Climate-smart agriculture

KW - Pathways

KW - Transformation

KW - Triple-win

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85058811423&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.12.006

DO - 10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.12.006

M3 - Review article

VL - 103

SP - 167

EP - 170

JO - Geoforum

JF - Geoforum

SN - 0016-7185

ER -