Abstract

This paper builds on previous geographical and social science work at the boundaries of climate change by (re)asserting the significance of the territoriality of the national state in global climate negotiations. Using the post-political consensus as a theoretical framework and drawing upon examples from climate change negotiations like Kyoto and Copenhagen, it argues that it is too premature to fetishize the consensus of, and collectivism between, national states in global climate politics. As geographers, ‘territoriality’, both as a material and discursive device, is fundamental in, and constitutive of, how we interpret and understand climate change and the politics thereof.