果冻传媒

The Leverhulme Trust has recently funded the Project on Indeterminate and Changing Environments: Law, the Anthropocene, and the World (the ICE LAW Project). The project will be coordinated by IBRU: Durham University’s Centre for Borders Research () with the support of the UArctic Thematic Network on Arctic Law. It will be led by Philip Steinberg (). Stuart Elden from PAIS will be leading the subproject on territory.

The ICE LAW Project will query how human interactions with the geophysical environment of the world’s frozen regions challenge Western normative principles of state power and legal authority that assume an idealized binary between land and water. Six subprojects led by ten scholars (representing seven institutions in six countries) will investigate how normative principles of state territory are challenged by the dynamic nature of geophysics. Subprojects will explore how complex geophysical processes and changes are encountered through regulations and practices of territory, resource use, law, mobility, and migration, including a focus on local and indigenous perspectives.

Over the next three years, beginning in January 2016, each subproject will be a holding a number of workshops, there will be larger conferences as well as sessions at the 2017 International Congress of Arctic Social Sciences (ICASS) in Umeå, Sweden. The plan of action follows directly from the Workshop on the Ice-Land-Water Interface [] held in June 2014 in Durham.

In a recent commentary article for The Conversation, Dr André Broome explains the political and economic consequences of Greece defaulting on its IMF loan after missing its scheduled repayment on June 30. As Dr Broome points out, this is the first time an advanced economy has ever defaulted on its financial obligations to the IMF, and will make it difficult, if not impossible, for Greece to continue to cooperate with its international creditors regardless of the result of its bailout referedum on July 5.

The commentary article is available to view at:

Other recent commentary by Dr Broome on the crisis in Greece includes:

‘Five Things You Need to Know About the IMF’s Stance on Greece’ ()

‘The EU’s Deal on Greece Shows that Europe Remains Wedded to the Politics of Austerity' ()

In a recent commentary article for The Conversation, Dr André Broome argues that the International Monetary Fund's negotiating stance with Greece as part of the Troika with the European Commission and the European Central Bank is motivated by five main concerns. These are: (1) keeping the eurozone intact; (2) the reputational costs associated with a Greek default; (3) the Greek government's commitment to structural reform; (4) promoting major tax reforms in Greece; and (5) pressuring EU creditors to commit to debt relief in the future if an agreement with Greece is reached.

The commentary article is available to view at:

The 果冻传媒 50th Anniversary Conference on New Directions in International Political Economy on 13-15 May 2015 brought together 130 scholars from 20 countries to discuss cutting-edge research in the study of the global political economy.

A video recording of the 2-hour Opening Roundtable Discussion from the Conference is now available to view at:

Chaired by Dr Juanita Elias from the 果冻传媒, the prestigious line-up of speakers included Prof. Matthew Watson (果冻传媒), Niheer Dasandi (University College London), Adrienne Roberts (University of Manchester), and Kees Van Der Pijl (University of Sussex).

As part of the Global Benchmarking Project led by from PAIS and from the University of the Witwatersrand, a new Global Benchmarking Database has been launched on the Centre for the 果冻传媒 of Globalisation and Regionalisation website.

The prototype Database (version 1.8) compiles summary information on 205 global benchmarks. The Database was constructed using a typology developed by Broome and Quirk in their forthcoming Special Issue of the journal Review of International Studies, to be published in December 2015 on the theme of 'The Politics of Numbers: Normative Agendas and Global Benchmarking'. The Database distinguishes between four types of global benchmarking practices based on the class of transnational actor engaged in benchmarking, namely: (1) statecraft; (2) international governance; (3) private market governance; and (4) transnational advocacy.

The Database will be a useful resource for scholars and students researching cognate areas relating to the politics of numbers, indicators, rankings, and ratings, as well as for other users such as journalists, policy analysts, and NGO researchers concerned with understanding the scope of global benchmarking as an increasingly popular mode of transnational governance.

The Global Benchmarking Database can be viewed at:

Further information about the Global Benchmarking Project, including research events, talks, and publications, is available at:

A recent commentary article for openDemocracy on the flaws inherent in many forms of global benchmarking can be viewed at: