Climate justice: between Mammon and Mother Earth

Mandy Meikle, Jake Wilson, Tahseen Jafry

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    Purpose
    This paper aims to contribute to the ethical debate over roles and responsibilities to address the injustices of climate change and its impacts. The current impasse over taking action may lie in the very different ways people view the world and their place in it. The aim is to explore some profound contradictions within differing strands of knowledge feeding into common understandings of climate justice.

    Design/methodology/approach
    A literature review of appropriate peer-reviewed and “grey” literature was conducted with a view to defining the term “climate justice”.

    Findings
    In addition to there being no single, clear definition of climate justice, a fundamental schism was found between what indigenous peoples want to see happen and what industrialised nations can do with respect to both the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change.

    Research limitations/implications
    One limitation to defining climate justice, and reason for publishing, is the lack of peer-reviewed work on this topic.

    Practical implications
    This paper has many practical implications, the most fundamental of which is the need to reach a consensus over rights to the Earth’s resources. If humanity, within which there are many societies, chooses to follow a truly equitable path post 2015, industrialised countries and corporations will need to move away from “endless growth economics”. The ways in which climate justice might be operationalised in future are considered, including the concept of a “climate-justice” checklist.

    Originality/value
    While the reconciliation proposed in this paper might be considered idealistic, unless it is acknowledged the Earth’s resources are limited, over-exploited and for all people to use sustainably, thus requiring a reduction in consumption by individuals relatively affluent in global terms, climate negotiators will continue talking about the same issues without achieving meaningful change.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)488-504
    Number of pages17
    JournalInternational Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management
    Volume8
    Issue number4
    Early online date27 Mar 2016
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 15 Aug 2016

    Fingerprint

    justice
    climate
    climate change
    gray literature
    resource
    literature review
    reconciliation
    resources
    economic growth
    corporation
    mitigation
    responsibility
    methodology
    lack
    society

    Keywords

    • climate change
    • ethical debate
    • knowledge
    • sustainable development
    • human rights
    • equity
    • climate justice

    Cite this

    @article{5cee40ab507e4c5f89eb63904c3491d0,
    title = "Climate justice: between Mammon and Mother Earth",
    abstract = "PurposeThis paper aims to contribute to the ethical debate over roles and responsibilities to address the injustices of climate change and its impacts. The current impasse over taking action may lie in the very different ways people view the world and their place in it. The aim is to explore some profound contradictions within differing strands of knowledge feeding into common understandings of climate justice.Design/methodology/approachA literature review of appropriate peer-reviewed and “grey” literature was conducted with a view to defining the term “climate justice”.FindingsIn addition to there being no single, clear definition of climate justice, a fundamental schism was found between what indigenous peoples want to see happen and what industrialised nations can do with respect to both the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change.Research limitations/implicationsOne limitation to defining climate justice, and reason for publishing, is the lack of peer-reviewed work on this topic.Practical implicationsThis paper has many practical implications, the most fundamental of which is the need to reach a consensus over rights to the Earth’s resources. If humanity, within which there are many societies, chooses to follow a truly equitable path post 2015, industrialised countries and corporations will need to move away from “endless growth economics”. The ways in which climate justice might be operationalised in future are considered, including the concept of a “climate-justice” checklist.Originality/valueWhile the reconciliation proposed in this paper might be considered idealistic, unless it is acknowledged the Earth’s resources are limited, over-exploited and for all people to use sustainably, thus requiring a reduction in consumption by individuals relatively affluent in global terms, climate negotiators will continue talking about the same issues without achieving meaningful change.",
    keywords = "climate change , ethical debate, knowledge, sustainable development, human rights, equity, climate justice",
    author = "Mandy Meikle and Jake Wilson and Tahseen Jafry",
    note = "Acceptance email in SAN. AAM requested. Record originally created by Library on behalf of author as requested by JM. ET 16-5-16",
    year = "2016",
    month = "8",
    day = "15",
    doi = "10.1108/IJCCSM-06-2015-0089",
    language = "English",
    volume = "8",
    pages = "488--504",
    journal = "International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management",
    issn = "1756-8692",
    publisher = "Emerald Publishing Limited",
    number = "4",

    }

    Climate justice: between Mammon and Mother Earth. / Meikle, Mandy; Wilson, Jake; Jafry, Tahseen.

    In: International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, Vol. 8, No. 4, 15.08.2016, p. 488-504.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Climate justice: between Mammon and Mother Earth

    AU - Meikle, Mandy

    AU - Wilson, Jake

    AU - Jafry, Tahseen

    N1 - Acceptance email in SAN. AAM requested. Record originally created by Library on behalf of author as requested by JM. ET 16-5-16

    PY - 2016/8/15

    Y1 - 2016/8/15

    N2 - PurposeThis paper aims to contribute to the ethical debate over roles and responsibilities to address the injustices of climate change and its impacts. The current impasse over taking action may lie in the very different ways people view the world and their place in it. The aim is to explore some profound contradictions within differing strands of knowledge feeding into common understandings of climate justice.Design/methodology/approachA literature review of appropriate peer-reviewed and “grey” literature was conducted with a view to defining the term “climate justice”.FindingsIn addition to there being no single, clear definition of climate justice, a fundamental schism was found between what indigenous peoples want to see happen and what industrialised nations can do with respect to both the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change.Research limitations/implicationsOne limitation to defining climate justice, and reason for publishing, is the lack of peer-reviewed work on this topic.Practical implicationsThis paper has many practical implications, the most fundamental of which is the need to reach a consensus over rights to the Earth’s resources. If humanity, within which there are many societies, chooses to follow a truly equitable path post 2015, industrialised countries and corporations will need to move away from “endless growth economics”. The ways in which climate justice might be operationalised in future are considered, including the concept of a “climate-justice” checklist.Originality/valueWhile the reconciliation proposed in this paper might be considered idealistic, unless it is acknowledged the Earth’s resources are limited, over-exploited and for all people to use sustainably, thus requiring a reduction in consumption by individuals relatively affluent in global terms, climate negotiators will continue talking about the same issues without achieving meaningful change.

    AB - PurposeThis paper aims to contribute to the ethical debate over roles and responsibilities to address the injustices of climate change and its impacts. The current impasse over taking action may lie in the very different ways people view the world and their place in it. The aim is to explore some profound contradictions within differing strands of knowledge feeding into common understandings of climate justice.Design/methodology/approachA literature review of appropriate peer-reviewed and “grey” literature was conducted with a view to defining the term “climate justice”.FindingsIn addition to there being no single, clear definition of climate justice, a fundamental schism was found between what indigenous peoples want to see happen and what industrialised nations can do with respect to both the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change.Research limitations/implicationsOne limitation to defining climate justice, and reason for publishing, is the lack of peer-reviewed work on this topic.Practical implicationsThis paper has many practical implications, the most fundamental of which is the need to reach a consensus over rights to the Earth’s resources. If humanity, within which there are many societies, chooses to follow a truly equitable path post 2015, industrialised countries and corporations will need to move away from “endless growth economics”. The ways in which climate justice might be operationalised in future are considered, including the concept of a “climate-justice” checklist.Originality/valueWhile the reconciliation proposed in this paper might be considered idealistic, unless it is acknowledged the Earth’s resources are limited, over-exploited and for all people to use sustainably, thus requiring a reduction in consumption by individuals relatively affluent in global terms, climate negotiators will continue talking about the same issues without achieving meaningful change.

    KW - climate change

    KW - ethical debate

    KW - knowledge

    KW - sustainable development

    KW - human rights

    KW - equity

    KW - climate justice

    U2 - 10.1108/IJCCSM-06-2015-0089

    DO - 10.1108/IJCCSM-06-2015-0089

    M3 - Article

    VL - 8

    SP - 488

    EP - 504

    JO - International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management

    JF - International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management

    SN - 1756-8692

    IS - 4

    ER -