Climate justice
Climate justice is a type of environmental justice that focuses on the unequal impacts of climate change on marginalized or otherwise vulnerable populations. Climate justice seeks to achieve an equitable distribution of both the burdens of climate change and the efforts to mitigate climate change through advocacy and policy change. The economic burden of climate change mitigation is estimated by some at around 1% to 2% of GDP. Climate justice examines concepts such as equality, human rights, collective rights, justice and the historical responsibilities for climate change.
Climate justice recognizes that those who have benefited most from industrialization are disproportionately responsible for the accumulation of carbon dioxide in the earth's atmosphere, and thus for climate change. Meanwhile, there is growing consensus that people in regions that are the least responsible for climate change as well as the world's poorest and most marginalized communities often tend to suffer the greatest consequences, with, for example, health problems due to being raised in an unhealthy environment. Depending on the country and context, this will often include people with low-incomes, indigenous communities or communities of color. They might also be further disadvantaged by responses to climate change which might exacerbate existing inequalities around race, gender, sexuality and disability. When those affected the most by climate change despite having contributed the least to causing it are also negatively affected by responses to climate change, this is known as the 'triple injustice' of climate change.
Conceptions of climate justice can be grouped along the lines of procedural justice and distributive justice. The former stresses fair, transparent and inclusive decision-making. The latter stresses a fair distribution of the costs and outcomes of climate change. There are at least ten different principles that are helpful to distribute climate costs fairly. Climate justice also tries to address the social implications of climate change mitigation. If these are not addressed properly, this could result in profound economic and social tensions. It could even lead to delays in necessary changes.
Climate justice actions can include the growing global body of climate litigation. In 2017, a report of the United Nations Environment Programme identified 894 ongoing legal actions worldwide.
Definition and objectives
Use and popularity of climate justice language has increased dramatically in recent years, yet climate justice is understood in many ways, and the different meanings are sometimes contested. At its simplest, conceptions of climate justice can be grouped along the following two lines:- procedural justice, which emphasizes fair, transparent and inclusive decision making, and
- distributive justice, which places the emphasis on who bears the costs of both climate change and the actions taken to address it.
Climate justice examines concepts such as equality, human rights, collective rights, and the historical responsibilities for climate change. There are procedural dimensions of climate change mitigation, as well as distributive ethical ones. Recognition and respect are the underlying basis for distributive and procedural justice.
Related fields are environmental justice and social justice.
Causes of injustice
Economic systems
The fundamental differences in economic systems, such as capitalism and socialism as a root cause of climate injustice is an often debated and contentious issue. In this context, fundamental disagreements arise between conservative environmental groups on one side and leftist organizations on the other. While the former often tend to blame the excesses of neoliberalism for climate change and argue in favor of market-based reform within capitalism, the latter view capitalism with its exploitative traits as the underlying central issue. Other possible causal explanations include hierarchies based on the group differences and the nature of the fossil fuel industry itself.Systemic causes
The unwarranted rate of climate change, along with its inequality of burdens, are seen as structural injustice perpetuated by systemic issues. There is political responsibility for the maintenance and support of existing structural processes. This is despite assumed viable potential alternative models based on novel technologies and means. As a criterion for determining responsibility for climate change, individual causal contribution does not matter as much as responsibility for the perpetuation of carbon-intensive practices and institutions. It has been argued that these systemic issues have evolved from and been perpetuated by a long history of practices such as colonization. These systemic causes have differing effects on the groups they are creating issues for. For example, issues with pipelines and oil drilling in the United States often stem from the fact that pipelines are built on Indigenous land. Because of the systems of oppression such as colonialism and settler colonialism that have made Indigenous communities more susceptible to being treated as expendable, it is often difficult for these communities to take action against large corporations. Systemically related climate justice issues are seen globally, especially in places where colonization has occurred These structures constitute the global politico-economic system, rather than enabling structural changes towards a system that does not facilitate exploitation of people and nature.For others, climate justice could be pursued through existing economic frameworks, global organizations and policy mechanisms. Therefore, the root causes could be found in the causes that so far inhibited global implementation of measures like emissions trading schemes.
Disproportionality between causality and burden
The responsibility for climate change differs substantially among individuals and groups. Many of the people and nations most affected by climate change are among the least responsible for it. The most affluent citizens of the world are responsible for most environmental impacts. Robust action by them and their governments is necessary to reduce these impacts.According to a 2020 report by Oxfam and the Stockholm Environment Institute, the richest 1% of the global population have caused twice as much carbon emissions as the poorest 50% over the 25 years from 1990 to 2015. This was, respectively, during that period, 15% of cumulative emissions compared to 7%. A second 2023 report found the richest 1% of humans produce more carbon emissions than poorest 66%, while the top 10% richest people account for more than half of global carbon emissions.
The bottom half of the population is directly responsible for less than 20% of energy footprints and consume less than the top 5% in terms of trade-corrected energy. High-income people usually have higher energy footprints as they use more energy-intensive goods. In particular, the largest disproportionality was identified to be in the domain of transport, where the top 10% consume 56% of vehicle fuel and conduct 70% of vehicle purchases.
A 2023 review article found that if there were a 2°C temperature rise by 2100, roughly 1 billion primarily poor people would die as a result of primarily wealthy people's greenhouse gas emissions.
Some already existing effects of climate change hit harder people with high income. The increase of wildfires in the west of the USA "have disproportionately been borne by high-income, white, and older residents, and by owners of high-value properties;" This is because those properties have more greenery. There is similar effect with floods.
Intergenerational equity
Preventable severe effects of climate change are likely to occur during the lifetime of the present adult population. Under current climate policy pledges, children born in 2020 will experience over their lifetimes, 2–7 times as many heat waves, as well as more of other extreme weather events compared to people born in 1960. This raises issues of intergenerational equity as it was these generations who are mainly responsible for the burden of climate change.This illustrates that emissions produced by any given generation can lock-in damage for one or more future generations. Climate change could progressively become more threatening for the generations affected than for the generation responsible for the threats. The climate system contains tipping points, such as the amount of deforestation of the Amazon that will launch the forest's irreversible decline. A generation whose continued emissions drive the climate system past such significant tipping points inflicts severe injustice on multiple future generations.
Disproportionate impacts on disadvantaged groups
Disadvantaged groups will continue to be especially impacted as climate change persists. These groups will be affected due to inequalities based on demographic characteristics such as gender, race, ethnicity, age, and income. Inequality increases the exposure of disadvantaged groups to harmful effects of climate change. The damage is worsened because disadvantaged groups are last to receive emergency relief and are rarely included in the planning process at local, national and international levels for coping with the impacts of climate change. These are also exacerbated by systematic injustice structures that keep marginalized groups in a state of being seen as expendable by the government. Unless steps are taken to provide these groups with more access to universal resources and protection, disadvantaged groups will continue to suffer the most from climate justice issues.Communities of color have long been targets of climate related injustices. Systems of racism and colonialism have created power imbalances where communities of color will often suffer when it comes to environmental justice issues. Communities of color are often also low-income communities and suffer from historical injustices like redlining that make it significantly harder to fight back against climate related issues.
Women are also disadvantaged and will be affected by climate change differently than men. Women are more likely to experience gender based violence such as assault and rape and violence will often follow climate justice issues. For example, oil pipelines will frequently house workers in isolated communities known as "man camps". These camps of primarily male workers have been found to bring higher rates of gender based violence to local communities around them, especially for indigenous women. Overall, a history of being seen as lesser and more expendable has made it so women's voices are not valued as much in times of environmental crisis.
Indigenous groups are affected by the consequences of climate change even though they historically have contributed the least to causing it. Indigenous peoples are often initially affected by settler colonialism and displacement by colonizers, which then makes it difficult to establish grounds to fight back against climate injustices. In the United States, Indigenous land is often exploited for resources like oil and critical minerals. Historically, instances like the Dawes Act have created cases of environmental injustice through the removal of Indigenous peoples from their land. Their land is also often treated as dumping sites for hazardous materials, such as nuclear waste. Indigenous people are unjustly impacted, and they continue to have fewer resources to cope with climate change.
Low-income communities face higher vulnerability to climate change. Low-income communities often become places where companies will establish harmful factories or mining practices, leading to issues like ecological and chemical runoff. An example of this is Norco, Louisiana, where there are multiple oil refineries. It is frequently referred to as "cancer alley". Low-income communities will often be disproportionately impacted by heat waves, air quality, and extreme weather events.