Research & Projects

Abstract: Experts increasingly agree that the impacts of climate change are likely to create new violent conflict risks and exacerbate existing ones. However, the extent of this link and the specific causal pathways are much less clear, and the role of gender in this process is under-examined. This paper theorizes that gendered norms, especially the expectations of how men perform their masculinities, are an intervening variable that might explain some of this relationship. In doing so, it engages with the emerging debate around the extent to which climate change influences the evolution of violent conflict, theorizing with an illustrative observation of the events of the Arab Spring in Tunisia and Syria. I find that there are plausible explanations for climate–conflict links involving gendered expectations of men’s behaviour serving as an intervening variable between climate change and violent conflict and discuss the implications of this for moving away from securitized approaches, future study and peacebuilding work.

Francis, B. (2024). Be a man: A theory of climate change, masculinities and violence. Environment and Security, 2(1), 121-144. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/27538796241230584

Abstract: As our understanding of violence becomes at once both broader and more complex, peace scholars must revisit notions of nonviolence and interrogate some of the more pacifist norms of our field. In this chapter I propose that violent peacebuilding, the utilization of violence in pursuit of positive peace, is not only sometimes a legitimate strategic choice for peacebuilders, but that it is incumbent upon peace workers and scholars to understand it as such. This paper draws on decolonial theory as well as bottom up traditions of peacebuilding to make an argument in support of tactical approaches to peacebuilding that are not imposed from the distant preferences of those unaffected by entrenched systems of violence.

The chapter takes a theory-building approach by engaging with a number of literatures, including social movements literature, and develops a framework in which instances of violence and vandalism are potentially understood as peacebuilding tools, whilst discussing their limitations. The chapter illustrates the theory through engagement with two specific examples, one contemporary and one historic, of direct violence employed towards pro-peace ends. By examining the violent tactics of the British suffragette movement and the moment of the burning of the Minneapolis police third district precinct headquarters in the wake of George Floyd’s murder, I posit the peacebuilding value of destructive acts, as well as anticipating and responding to counter-arguments. The chapter argues for a redefinition of some of the normative assumptions regarding the value of nonviolence in peace work, especially where that peace work has become professionalized.

Francis, B. (Forthcoming). Violent Peacebuilding in Critical Perspectives on Peace. Palgrave MacMillan.

(Under R&R at Peacebuilding)

Abstract: The field of peace studies is necessarily concerned with issues of equity, justice, and inclusion. Notions of violence that define the field and a normative commitment to positive, sustainable peace mean that peace scholars often engage with ideas of identity and power. Thus, it is important to understand how the field is creating norms and expectations around the concept of positionality. Positionality refers to elements of identity or background which may influence the way scholars engage with the research process. A positionality statement is an increasingly common device used in academic writing which states these factors explicitly for the purpose of communicating transparently with the writer’s audience. This article examines the use of positionality statements in five leading peace studies journals and finds that while positionality statements remain rare in the field, their use is rapidly increasing, with significant diversity in how and where they are used, and by whom.

Abstract: A substantial body of work finds that politicians in the United States are polarized on climate policy. In this paper, we examine the conditions under which U.S. politicians might break with their party’s position about the climate and discuss climate policy in a way that is more similar to the other party. To do this, we employ a word embeddings approach for measuring the context surrounding discussions of climate. We train our embeddings on an original corpus of nearly 5,000 campaign platforms collected from the web pages of candidates running in the 2018, 2020, and 2022 U.S. House elections. We demonstrate that Republican candidates adopt rhetorical strategies more similar to Democrats when their district is more vulnerable to natural disasters and constituency opinion favors government action on climate change. Democrats do not stray from party messages about climate change—even if their district relies heavily on the production or utilization of fossil fuels.

Abstract: What factors are shaping attitudes on issues of climate change? Public opinion remains divided in many countries on how best to tackle the ongoing climate crisis, with notable diversity in terms of salience and commitment to climate action. Previous literature shows that public opinion on these matters is driven, in part, by elite cues and that the divide we see is a result of elite polarization.  This paper examines climate attitudes in the UK and uses a novel survey experiment to test the types of leadership that might drive shifts in climate opinion.  I find that elite cues are in fact non-consequential and find results in the survey data which suggest their waning influence is being blocked by the rising salience of populist polarisation.  These findings suggest previous work on the role of elite cues in attitude-shaping may be less relevant as climate opinion is increasingly driven by partisan identification, especially in the presence of far right populists who adopt anti-climate positions.

Abstract:  A framework of symbolic, descriptive, and substantive representations has been established to understand gender quotas. However, this framework was largely developed in regards to policy-making legislative bodies and has only been recently extended to the local level in an ad hoc manner. In this paper, we systematically expand this framework to the administrative level to bridge gaps among quota, individual-level empowerment, and development research. We argue that while the mechanisms of local representation map on to representation traditionally understood, they are distinct. To illustrate, we apply the framework to a newly implemented local reserved seat system in urban Nepal through semi-structured interviews (n = 91) with residents and officials, and a multigenerational focus group of residents (group = 1, n = 8). Using this framework, we find that hyperlocal quotas can increase resident engagement and support service delivery. We also identify gaps that preclude the system from reaching its potential. 

This research project was generously supported by a research grant from The Liu Institute at the University of Notre Dame

Abstract: Why did an urgent political collaboration between George Orwell, Arthur Koestler, and Bertrand Russell on a ‘Manifesto’ for a new ‘League’ for the ‘Rights of Man’ fail within six months in early 1946? The archival evidence indicates that an abusive culture of indecent assault, exploitation of women’s labour, and disregard of women’s rights tainted the Manifesto’s drafting and dissemination, and halted the related national-level ‘Petition’ to the British government on the foreign policy issues of nuclear disarmament, freedom of information, and cultural exchange with communist societies. Countering the abusive culture from within this Leftist and liberal intellectual circle, a group of women (Mamaine Paget Koestler, Celia Paget Kirwan, Patricia ‘Peter’ Russell, Katharine Stewart-Murray, and Ruth Fischer) kept the Manifesto’s influence alive at the same time that the conflicted sexual dynamics of the circle undermined Orwell, Koestler, and Russell’s professed commitments to rights and democracy in the immediate postwar era.

Abstract:  In the pursuit of environmental justice and local autonomy it is important to understand how communities and social movements are able to achieve success in pursuing their aims. The Island of Vieques off the Eastern coast of Puerto Rico has had cause to consider these paths to success or failure over recent years given the prevailing environmental impact and ongoing cleanup mission associated with the United States Navy’s decades long occupation of the island. This occupation came to an end in 2003, following a successful campaign of resistance by Vieques residents. Contemporary efforts to improve this cleanup process, ensure environmental protections, and demand accountability from the US military continue. Given the success of the earlier campaign and the slow movement of the current one, this paper explores competing explanations for this divergence of outcomes in an identical geographic location and a relatively small temporal window. This article attempts to identify and articulate the potential explanations and, using a formal Bayesian process tracing approach, assesses a range of evidence gathered on a mixed methods basis, including novel survey data and relevant remote sensor (satellite) data.

This paper is part of a larger research project in Vieques, further details of which can be found here