Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The role of rights, risks and responsibilities in the climate justice debate

The role of rights, risks and responsibilities in the climate justice debate PurposeTo use the results of a synthesis of six social science fellowships to explore how alternative framings of the climate justice debate can support fairer climate policies. Design/methodology/approachThe original fellowships drew on sociology, economics, geography, psychology and international relations. Cross-cutting themes of rights, risks and responsibilities were identified following a series of workshops. Results of these workshops were discussed in a number of policy fora. Analysis of the feedback from that fora is used to propose the case for a rights, risks and responsibilities approach to building a more accessible climate justice debate.FindingsExisting climate policy unjustly displaces responsibility for emission reductions, risks from climate impacts and loss of rights. Foundational questions of acceptable risk have been ignored and a just climate policy requires procedurally just ways of revisiting this first order question.Research limitations/implicationsThe contribution a rights, risks and responsibilities framework can bring to a process of educating for climate stewardship is at this stage theoretical. It is only through trialling a rights, risks and responsibilities approach to climate justice debates with the relevant stakeholders that its true potential can be assessed.Practical implicationsPolicy actors expressed strong resistance to the idea of overhauling current decision-making processes and policy frameworks. However, moving forward from this point with a more nuanced and tactical understanding of the dialectical relationship between rights, risks and responsibilities has the potential to improve those processes.Originality/valueReveals limits to public engagement with climate policy generated by a ‘justice’ framing. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management Emerald Publishing

The role of rights, risks and responsibilities in the climate justice debate

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/the-role-of-rights-risks-and-responsibilities-in-the-climate-justice-1bopSn6xOl
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN
1756-8692
DOI
10.1108/IJCCSM-10-2014-0127
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

PurposeTo use the results of a synthesis of six social science fellowships to explore how alternative framings of the climate justice debate can support fairer climate policies. Design/methodology/approachThe original fellowships drew on sociology, economics, geography, psychology and international relations. Cross-cutting themes of rights, risks and responsibilities were identified following a series of workshops. Results of these workshops were discussed in a number of policy fora. Analysis of the feedback from that fora is used to propose the case for a rights, risks and responsibilities approach to building a more accessible climate justice debate.FindingsExisting climate policy unjustly displaces responsibility for emission reductions, risks from climate impacts and loss of rights. Foundational questions of acceptable risk have been ignored and a just climate policy requires procedurally just ways of revisiting this first order question.Research limitations/implicationsThe contribution a rights, risks and responsibilities framework can bring to a process of educating for climate stewardship is at this stage theoretical. It is only through trialling a rights, risks and responsibilities approach to climate justice debates with the relevant stakeholders that its true potential can be assessed.Practical implicationsPolicy actors expressed strong resistance to the idea of overhauling current decision-making processes and policy frameworks. However, moving forward from this point with a more nuanced and tactical understanding of the dialectical relationship between rights, risks and responsibilities has the potential to improve those processes.Originality/valueReveals limits to public engagement with climate policy generated by a ‘justice’ framing.

Journal

International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and ManagementEmerald Publishing

Published: Aug 15, 2016

References