Week |
Subject |
Related Preparation |
1) |
Introduction |
|
2) |
Introducing framework and historical background |
*Introduction, Green Planet Blues (Conca, Alberty and Dabelko ed.s, 1995), p. 3-12.
Visual material: Planet Earth
|
3) |
Growth, limits, and the commons |
*Meadows, Meadows, Randers and Behrens III. 1998.‘The Nature of Exponential Growth’, in Debating the Earth, The Environmental Politics Reader, Dryzec and Schlosberg eds. p. 9-22.
*Hardin. 1995 (1968).‘The Tragedy of the Commons’, in Conca, Alberty and Dabelko (eds.), Green Planet Blues, p. 38-45.
Feeny, Berkes, McCay, Acheson. 1995 (1990).‘The Tragedy of the Commons: Twenty-Two Years Later’, in Conca, Alberty and Dabelko (eds.), Green Planet Blues: p. 53-62.
*Ostrom, E. 1994. ‘Neither market nor state: Governance of common-pool resources in the twenty-first century’, Lecture series 2, International Food Policy Research Institute.
**choice of project actor due**
|
4) |
Environment and development: the sustainability debate-I |
*World Commission on Environment and Development. 2004. ‘From One Earth to One World’, in F. J. Lechner and J. Boli (eds.), The Globalization Reader, Blackwell: p.366-372.
UN Conference on Environment and Development, ‘Rio Declaration on Environment and Development’, in F. J. Lechner and J. Boli (eds.), The Globalization Reader, Blackwell: p. 373-376.
*Daly, H. E. 1998 (1990). ‘Sustainable Growth: An Impossibility Theorem’, in Debating the Earth, Environmental Politics Reader, J. Dryzec and D. Schlosberg (eds.), Oxford University Press: p. 285-289.
|
5) |
Environment and development: the sustainability debate- II |
*Carruthers, D. 2005 (2000). ‘From Opposition to Orthodoxy’: the Remaking of Sustainable Development’ in Debating the Earth, Environmental Politics Reader, J. Dryzec and D. Schlosberg (eds.), Oxford University Press: p. 285-300.
Baker, S. 2007, ‘Sustainable development as symbolic commitment: Declaratory politics and the seductive appeal of ecological modernization in the European Union’, Environmental Politics, 16:2, 297-317.
Meadowcroft, J. 2005 (2000). ‘Sustainable Development: A New(ish) Idea for a New Century?’, in Debating the Earth, Environmental Politics Reader, J. Dryzec and D. Schlosberg (eds.), Oxford University Press: p. 265-284.
Visual material: Learning from Ladakh
|
6) |
Environment and modernity: ecological modernization, risk society, deep ecology (anthropocentric versus ecological views) |
*Barry, J. 2005 (2003). ‘Ecological Modernization’ in Debating the Earth, Environmental Politics Reader, J. Dryzec and D. Schlosberg (eds.), Oxford University Press: p. 303-321.
York, R., E. A. Rosa, and T. Dietz. 2003. “Footprints on the Earth: the Environmental Consequences of Modernity”, American Sociological Review, 68, 2: 279-300.
Mol, A. P. J. 2002. ‘Ecological Modernization and the Global Economy’, Global Environmental Politics, 2 (February): 92-115.
*Beck, U. 1998 (1992). ‘From Industrial Society to the Risk Society: Questions of Survival, Social Structure, and Ecological Enlightment’, in Debating the Earth, Environmental Politics Reader, J. Dryzec and D. Schlosberg (eds.), Oxford University Press: p. 327-346.
|
7) |
Environment and modernity II: deep ecology, anthropocentric versus ecological views, political ecology |
*Dobson, A., 2003, ‘Ch.3: Ecological Citizenship’ in Citizenship and the Environment, Oxford University Press: p. 92-102, 105-108, 111-115.
‘Green political economy and the promise of the social economy’, J. Barry and G. Smith in Handbook of Global Environmental Politics, P. Dauverge (ed.), 2005, UK and USA: Edward Elgar.
Bakker, K. 2007. ‘The ‘Commons’ Versus’ the ‘Commodity’: Alter-globalization, Anti-privatization and the Human Right to Water in the Global South’, Antipode.
Arsel, M, B. Akbulut, ve F. Adaman. 2016. ‘Türkiye’de Kalkınmacılığı Yeniden Okumak: Hes’ler ve dönüşen Devlet-Toplum-Doğa İlişkileri’, İletişim.
Paker, H. 2017. ‘The politics of serving’ and neoliberal developmentalism: the megaprojects of the AKP as tools of hegemony building’, in Adaman, Akbulut and Arsel (ed.), Neoliberal Turkey and its discontents: Economic policy and the environment under Erdoğan’, I. B. Tauris.
|
8) |
Framing the problem: The environmental movement |
*Agyeman, J. et al. 2016. ‘Trends and Directions in Environmental Justice: From Inequity to Everyday Life, Community, and Just Sustainabilities’, Annual Review of Environment and Resources
*Doherty, B. and T. Doyle, 2006, ‘Beyond Borders: Transnational politics, social movements and modern environmentalisms’, Environmental Politics, 15, 5: 697-712.
Keck, M. and K. Sikkink. 1998. Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
|
9) |
Urgent matters: climate change |
*Genovese, F., 2014, ‘States’ interests at international climate negotiations: new measures of bargaining positions’, Environmental Politics, 23, 4: 610-631.
*Bäckstrand, Karin, Jonathan W. Kuyper, Björn-Ola Linnér & Eva Lövbrand, 2017, Non-state actors in global climate governance: from Copenhagen to Paris and beyond, Environmental Politics, 26:4, 561-579.
*Vanderheiden, S., 2011, ‘The Politics of Energy: An introduction’, Environmental Politics, 20, 5:607-616.
Visual material: Age of Stupid
**Assignment 1 due**
https://juliesbicycle.com/resource_hub/climate-literacy-101/
**Presentation outline due**
|
10) |
The global commons: limits of national politics and issues of governance |
Newell. 2005. ‘Towards a political economy of global environmental governance’ in P. Dauverge (eds.), Handbook of Global Environmental Politics, Edward Elgar: 187-201.
*Soroos. 2005. ‘Garret Hardin and tragedies of global commons’, in P. Dauverge (eds.), Handbook of Global Environmental Politics, Edward Elgar.
*Downie, C., 2014, ‘Transnational actors in environmental politics: strategies and influence in long negotiations’, Environmental Politics, 23, 3: 376-394.
|
11) |
Presentations |
|
12) |
Presentations |
|
13) |
Environmental Politics in Turkey |
*Arsel, M., B. Akbulut, and F. Adaman. 2015. ‘Environmentalism of the malcontent: anatomy of an anti-coal power plant struggle’, Journal of Peasant Studies, 42, 2: 371- 395.
*Paker, H., F. Adaman, Z. Kadirbeyoglu, and B Ozkaynak, 2013, ‘Environmental organizations in Turkey: engaging the state and finance capital’, Environmental Politics, 22, 5: 760-778.
Kadirbeyoglu, Z. 2005. ‘Assessing the Efficacy of Transnational Advocacy Networks’ in Environmentalism in Turkey: Between Democracy and Development,F. Adaman and M. Arsel (eds.), Ashgate: p. 101-116.
|
14) |
Review and general evaluation |
|
|
Program Outcomes |
Level of Contribution |
1) |
Be able to specify functional and non-functional attributes of software projects, processes and products. |
|
2) |
Be able to design software architecture, components, interfaces and subcomponents of a system for complex engineering problems. |
|
3) |
Be able to develop a complex software system with in terms of code development, verification, testing and debugging. |
|
4) |
Be able to verify software by testing its program behavior through expected results for a complex engineering problem. |
|
5) |
Be able to maintain a complex software system due to working environment changes, new user demands and software errors that occur during operation. |
|
6) |
Be able to monitor and control changes in the complex software system, to integrate the software with other systems, and to plan and manage new releases systematically. |
|
7) |
Be able to identify, evaluate, measure, manage and apply complex software system life cycle processes in software development by working within and interdisciplinary teams. |
|
8) |
Be able to use various tools and methods to collect software requirements, design, develop, test and maintain software under realistic constraints and conditions in complex engineering problems. |
|
9) |
Be able to define basic quality metrics, apply software life cycle processes, measure software quality, identify quality model characteristics, apply standards and be able to use them to analyze, design, develop, verify and test complex software system. |
|
10) |
Be able to gain technical information about other disciplines such as sustainable development that have common boundaries with software engineering such as mathematics, science, computer engineering, industrial engineering, systems engineering, economics, management and be able to create innovative ideas in entrepreneurship activities. |
|
11) |
Be able to grasp software engineering culture and concept of ethics and have the basic information of applying them in the software engineering and learn and successfully apply necessary technical skills through professional life. |
|
12) |
Be able to write active reports using foreign languages and Turkish, understand written reports, prepare design and production reports, make effective presentations, give clear and understandable instructions. |
|
13) |
Be able to have knowledge about the effects of engineering applications on health, environment and security in universal and societal dimensions and the problems of engineering in the era and the legal consequences of engineering solutions. |
|