Can an alternative cosmovision challenge the market hegemony? : an analysis of article 6.8 in the Paris agreement

Sammanfattning: A rising global temperature and increased emissions, in combination with the slow progress of the yearly climate negotiations shows that there is something hindering the radical improvement needed to protect both the planet and humanity. The outset for this thesis is to study the UN climate negotiations and the alternative discourse that can question the hegemony. This thesis is therefore investigating how and if it is possible to challenge the hegemonic discourse by studying an alternative discourse promoted by Bolivia. By basing both the national legislative texts and arguments in international negotiations on the concept of Vivir Bien, the Good Life, Bolivia is challenging the hegemony. That is particularly visible in how Bolivia is arguing for the Article 6.8 of the Paris Agreement, a non-market approach that should contribute to reduced emissions and increased adaptation through voluntary collaborations between different actors. The thesis studies how the article can firstly affect the perception of nature within UNFCCC and secondly which effects it could have for forestry as an example of the sectors that would be affected. The methods used are interviews with civil society actors as well as an analysis of legislative texts and official documents from the Plurinational state of Bolivia. Through interviews, observations and a critical discourse analysis of both interviews and documents I identify how the different actors positions themselves in relation to the alternative discourse. The theoretical framework is based on approaches that has been identified as new imperialism and the Imperial mode of living. By analyzing the material with the theories mentioned I find that the non-market mechanisms presented in Article 6.8 challenges the Imperial mode of living that is reproduced by for example the market-based approaches. Furthermore, the results identify how the market-based mechanisms can reduce forests to carbon sequestrators, by that not recognizing the full value of forests and further might have negative consequences for the indigenous communities. The discourse which included Vivir Bien opens for the different values of forest as well as an alternative cosmovision. Both the state of Bolivia and the interviewees from civil society use the discourse but define it differently. Moreover, there is a critique expressed by the interviewees stating that Bolivia is presenting a discourse internationally which is not implemented nationally. Finally, the thesis highlights how the current hegemonic discourse can be challenged and if the discourse of Vivir Bien and Article 6.8 can constitute a counter-hegemony. My results show great expectations for Article 6.8, however that the mechanism itself is not the shift of hegemony demanded but rather a match-making facility well suiting the current structure. Even if Article 6.8 currently does not challenge the hegemonic discourse there are discussions taking place during the climate negotiations implying that a structural change is needed.