Abstract
ABSTRACTCalculative practices are everywhere, including the enactment and diffusion of sustainable development goals, such as quantifying and monetizing carbon markets, criteria for allocating donations for sustainability programs, and performance measurement of compromises and goals. We critically explore the performativity and counter‐performativity from the calculative practices orbiting and shaping the annual debate on climate governance and how they are related to the vulnerability of populations. Our qualitative analysis comprised a comprehensive set of documents produced by enrolled participants of meetings and workshops between two annual Conferences of the Parties of the United Nations. We identified and exemplified three calculative practices, and despite their intended performativity, some counter‐effects, like social exclusion and criticism by stakeholders, arise.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call