Empire is best understood not as a singular territorial or economic entity or an arrangement of flows and accumulation of stocks but, rather, as a type of rule. That is, it is the relationships between ruler and ruled, and the mechanisms of rule, that are important in contemporary discussions of “empire.” In today's American Empire, we see the mixing of two forms of rule: what is often called “neo-liberal institutionalism” with “new sovereignty.” In this commentary, I discuss the implications of such rule for global environmental politics.

This article addresses questions of method, focus and research strategy in environmental history and political economy for policy analysis and policy-making. While most environmental history is seen as having to do with landscapes past and how they got that way, environmental history can also have practical contemporary applications. By coming to understand the sources and origins of environmental degradation, and the patterns of social organization that led to them, we may be better positioned to foster environmental protection and conservation in ways that may resolve and/or support local efforts around the world. Such studies can help to address conflicts that arise over conservation policies, especially when these studies illuminate the origins and historical trajectories of places, and provide insights into ways of working with, rather than against, local cultures, knowledges, and social arrangements.

This essay disputes the arguments made by Robert Paehlke and John Dryzek in their contributions to this issue of Global Environmental Politics. Both reform and resistance are necessary, but not sufficient, elements in collective efforts to facilitating global and local environmental protection and sustainable development. What is essential, as well, are campaigns to establish alternative institutional frameworks for the fulfillment of these goals. This essay suggests that initiatives such as those found around the issue of sustainable forestry practices might be the basis for such frameworks and, in the long run, could pressure both capital and governments to agree on strengthened and effective systems of public environmental regulation. The essay also notes the so-called democratic deficit among non-governmental organizations and movements, but questions whether there is any democracy among capitals and international institutions.