Climate justice

Climate justice is a term that recognises "although global warming is a global crisis, its effects are not felt evenly around the world"[2]. Climate justice is a faction of Environmental justice[3] and focuses on the equitable distribution of the burdens of climate change and the efforts to mitigate them. It has been described as encompassing "a set of rights and obligations, which corporations, individuals and governments have towards those vulnerable people who will be in a way significantly disproportionately affected by climate change."[4]

Fridays for Future demonstration in Berlin in September 2021
In 2019, the Supreme Court of the Netherlands confirmed that the government must cut carbon dioxide emissions further, as climate change threatens citizens' human rights.[1]
Many participants of grassroots movements that demand climate justice also ask for system change.

Climate justice examines concepts such as equality, human rights, collective rights, and the historical responsibilities for climate change. This is done by relating the causes and effects of climate change to concepts of justice, particularly environmental justice and social justice.

Climate justice actions can include the growing global body of legal action on climate change issues.[5] In 2017, a report of the United Nations Environment Programme identified 894 ongoing legal actions worldwide.[6] Climate justice is an aspect of SDG 13 under UN Agenda 2030.

Conceptions of climate justice can be grouped along the lines of procedural justice, which emphasises 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.[7]

A main factor in the increased popularity and consideration of climate justice was the rise of grassroots movements – such as Fridays for Future, Ende Gelände, and Extinction Rebellion. A special focus is placed on the role of Most Affected People and Areas (MAPA),[8] i.e., groups overall disproportionately vulnerable to or affected by climate change, such as women, racial minorities, young, older and poorer people.[9]

Historically marginalised communities, such as low-income, indigenous communities and communities of colour often face the worst consequences of climate change: the least responsible for climate change broadly suffer its gravest consequences.[10][11][12] They might also be further disadvantaged by responses to climate change which might reproduce or exacerbate existing inequalities, which has been labeled the 'triple injustices' of climate change.[7][13][14]

Some climate justice approaches promote transformative justice where advocates focus on how vulnerability to climate change reflects various structural injustices in society, such as the exclusion of marginalised groups from climate resilient livelihoods, and that climate action must explicitly address these structural power imbalances. For these advocates, priority is placed on ensuring that responses to climate change do not repeat or reinforce existing injustices, which has both distributive justice and procedural justice dimensions.

Other conceptions frame climate justice in terms of the need to curb climate change within certain limits, like the Paris Agreement targets of 1.5 °C, as otherwise the impacts of climate change on natural ecosystems will be so severe as to preclude the possibility of justice for many generations and populations.[15] Other activists argue that failure to address social implications of climate change mitigation transitions could result in profound economic and social tensions and delay necessary changes[16] while ways that reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a socially just way – called a 'just transition'[17][18] – are possible, preferable, in better agreement with contemporary human rights, fairer, more ethical as well as possibly more effective.[19][20][21]

Definition and objectives
Part of a series on
Climate change and
society
Effects · Risk
Economics · Finance
Social issues · Ethics
Communication
Politics
See also: Just transition

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:[7]

  • 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.

The objectives of climate justice can be described as follows: "to encompasses a set of rights and obligations, which corporations, individuals and governments have towards those vulnerable people who will be in a way significantly disproportionately affected by climate change."[4]

Climate justice examines concepts such as equality, human rights, collective rights, and the historical responsibilities for climate change. Climate justice is mainly concerned with the procedural and distributive ethical dimensions of and for climate change mitigation.

The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report underlines another principle of climate justice which is the “recognition which entails basic respect and robust engagement with and fair consideration of diverse cultures and perspectives”.[22]  Alternatively, recognition and respect can be understood as the underlying basis for distributive and procedural justice.

Related fields are environmental justice and social justice.

Causes of injustice

Existing economic systems as a root cause
Among major emitters, the U.S. has higher annual per capita emissions than China, which has more total annual emissions.[23]
Cumulatively, U.S. and China emissions have caused the most greenhouse gas-related economic damage.[24]

One contentious issue in debates about climate justice is whether fundamental differences in economic systems, such as capitalism versus socialism, are the, or a, root cause of climate injustice. In this context, fundamental disagreements arise between, on the one hand, liberal and conservative environmental groups and, on the other, leftist and radical organizations. 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.[25][26] Other possible causal explanations include hierarchies based on the group differences and the nature of the fossil fuel regime itself.[27]

Systemic causes

It has been argued that the unwarranted rate of climate change, along with its inequality of burdens, is a structural injustice. There is political responsibility for the maintenance and support of historically constituted[28] 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 or capacity does not matter as much as the responsibility for the perpetuation of effectively carbon-intensive structures, practices, and institutions. These structures constitute the global politico-economic system, rather than enabling structural changes towards a system that does not naturally facilitate unsustainable exploitation of people and nature.[29][30]

For others, climate justice could be pursued through existing economic frameworks, global organizations and policy mechanisms. Therefore, for them the root-causes could be found in the causes that so far inhibited global implementation of measures like emissions trading schemes, specifically of forms that deliver the assumed mitigation results.[31]

Disproportionality between causality and burden
Emissions of the richest 1% are more than twice that of the poorest 50%.[32] Compliance with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C goal would require the richest 1% to reduce emissions by at least 30 times, while per-person emissions of the poorest 50% could approximately triple.[32]
Though total CO2 emissions (size of pie charts) differ substantially among high-emitting regions, the pattern of higher income classes emitting more than lower income classes is consistent across regions.[33] The world’s top 1% of emitters emit over 1000 times more than the bottom 1%.[33]
Scaling the effect of wealth to the national level: richer (developed) countries emit more CO2 per person than poorer (developing) countries.[34] Emissions are roughly proportional to GDP per person, though the rate of increase diminishes with average GDP/pp of about $10,000.

The responsibility for anthropogenic climate change differs substantially among individuals and groups. Studies find that the most affluent citizens of the world are responsible for most environmental impacts, and robust action by them is necessary for prospects of moving towards safer environmental conditions.[35][36]

According to a 2020 report by Oxfam and the Stockholm Environment Institute,[37][38] 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.[39][40][32] This was, respectively, during that period, 15% of cumulative emissions compared to 7%.[41]

A visualisation by country of the impact of climate change (country size) and its contribution (country colour)

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 individuals usually have higher energy footprints as they disproportionally use their larger financial resources – which they can usually spend freely in their entirety for any purpose as long as the end user purchase is legal – for energy-intensive goods. In particular, the largest disproportionality was identified to be in the domain of transport, where e.g. the top 10% consume 56% of vehicle fuel and conduct 70% of vehicle purchases.[42]

Many of the people and nations most affected by climate change are among the least responsible for it.[43][44]

A 2023 review article found that if there were a 2oC temperature rise by 2100, roughly 1 billion primarily poor people would die as a result of primarily wealthy people's greenhouse gas emissions.[45][46]

Intergenerational equity
Further information: intergenerational equity

The current nation states and world population need to make changes, including sacrifices (like uncomfortable lifestyle-changes,[47][48] alterations to public spending and changes to choice of work), today to enable climate justice for future generations.[49]

Preventable severe effects are projected to likely occur during the lifetime of the present adult population. Under current climate policy pledges, children born in 2020 (e.g. "Generation Alpha") 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, along with other projections, raises issues of intergenerational equity as it was these generations (specific groups and individuals and their collective governance and perpetuated economics) who have been mainly responsible for the burden of climate change.[50][51]

This illustrates the general fact that emissions produced by any given generation can lock-in damage for one or more future generations, making climate change progressively more threatening for the generations affected than for the generation responsible for the threats. Crucially, the climate system contains tipping points, such as the amount of deforestation of the Amazon that will launch the forest’s irreversible decline.[52][53] A generation whose continued emissions drive the climate system past such significant tipping points inflicts severe injustice on multiple future generations.[54]

Disproportionate impacts on disadvantaged groups
Further information: Climate change vulnerability

Disadvantaged groups will continue to be disproportionately impacted as climate change persists. These groups will be affected due to inequalities that are based on demographic characteristics such as differences in gender, race, ethnicity, age, and income.[55] Inequality increases the exposure of disadvantaged groups to the harmful effects of climate change while also increasing their susceptibility to destruction caused by climate change.[55] The damage is worsened because disadvantaged groups are the 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.[56]

Communities of color, women, indigenous groups, and people of low-income all face a larger vulnerability to climate change.[57][22] These groups will be disproportionately impacted due to heat waves, air quality, and extreme weather events.[58] Women are also disadvantaged and will be affected by climate change differently than men.[59] This may impact the ability of minority groups to adapt unless steps are taken to provide these groups with more access to universal resources.[60] Indigenous groups are affected by the consequences of climate change even though they historically have contributed the least.[58] In addition, indigenous peoples are unjustifiably impacted due to their low income, and they continue to have fewer resources to cope with climate change.[61]

Responses to improve climate justice
Burden on future generations

     One generation must not be allowed to consume large portions of the CO2 budget while bearing a relatively minor share of the reduction effort if this would involve leaving subsequent generations with a drastic reduction burden and expose their lives to comprehensive losses of freedom.

— German Federal Constitutional Court
April 2021[62]

Conclusion on the Rights of Nature

     The rights of nature protect ecosystems and natural processes for their intrinsic value, thus complementing them with the human right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. The rights of nature, like all constitutional rights, are justiciable and, consequently, judges are obliged to guarantee them.

— Constitutional Court of Ecuador[63][64]
10 November 2021

Common principles of justice in burden-sharing

There are three common principles of justice in burden-sharing that can be used in decision-making related to who bears the larger burdens of climate change globally and domestically: a) those who most caused the problem, b) those who have the most burden-carrying ability and c) those who have benefited most from the activities that cause climate change.[65] Observing calls for climate reparations in scientific literature, among climate movements, and in policy debates, a 2023 study published in One Earth estimated that the top 21 fossil fuel companies would owe cumulative climate reparations of $5.4 trillion over the period 2025–2050.[66]

Another method of deciding starts from the objective of preventing climate change e.g. beyond 1.5 °C and from there reason back to who should do what.[67] This makes use of the principles of justice in burden-sharing to maintain fairness.

Court cases and litigation

By December 2022, the number of climate change-related lawsuits had grown to 2,180, including 1,522 in the U.S.[68] Already in the present and based on existing laws, some relevant parties can be forced into action (to the degree of accountability, monitoring and law enforcement capacities and assessments of feasibility) by means of courts.[1]

This section is an excerpt from Climate change litigation.[edit]
Climate change litigation, also known as climate litigation, is an emerging body of environmental law using legal practice to set case law precedent to further climate change mitigation efforts from public institutions, such as governments and companies. In the face of slow politics of climate change delaying climate change mitigation, activists and lawyers have increased efforts to use national and international judiciary systems to advance the effort. Climate litigation typically engages in one of five types of legal claims:[69] Constitutional law (focused on breaches of constitutional rights by the state),[70] administrative law (challenging the merits of administrative decision making), private law (challenging corporations or other organizations for negligence, nuisance, etc., fraud or consumer protection (challenging companies for misrepresenting information about climate impacts), or human rights (claiming that failure to act on climate change fails to protect human rights).[71]
Rally for climate justice: Mass mobilization at the Chevron Oil Refinery in Richmond, California (2009)
Tens of thousands marching in Copenhagen for climate justice (2009).[72]

Human rights
The COP26 Climate Change Conference...

     ... acknowledging that climate change is a common concern of humankind, Parties should, when taking action to address climate change, respect, promote and consider their respective obligations on human rights, the right to health, the rights of indigenous peoples, local communities, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable situations and the right to development, as well as gender equality, empowerment of women and intergenerational equity, ...

— The Glasgow climate pact[73]
13 November 2021

This section is an excerpt from Human rights and climate change.[edit]
Human rights and climate change is a conceptual and legal framework under which international human rights and their relationship to global warming are studied, analyzed, and addressed.[74] The framework has been employed by governments, United Nations organizations, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, human rights and environmental advocates, and academics to guide national and international policy on climate change under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the core international human rights instruments.[75][76][77] In 2022 Working Group II of the IPCC suggested that "climate justice comprises justice that links development and human rights to achieve a rights-based approach to addressing climate change".[78]

Challenges

Disruption of social stability, jobs and uncomfortable changes
See also: Yellow vests protests § Fuel prices

Climate justice may often conflict with social stability whereby e.g. interventions that establish a more just pricing of products could facilitate social unrest[79][80] and interventions of socioeconomic decarbonization could lead to, not only decreased e.g. material possessions, number of freely choosable options, comfort, maintained habits and salaries,[35] but also at least temporary increased unemployment rates which may be problematic with contemporary psychology (possibly including norms, expectations, conscience,[81] pressures, feedbacks, bias, plasticity[36] and awareness) and socioeconomic structures (possibly including structural facilitation mechanisms for economic activities, enforceable policies, media systems and education apparatuses)[82] even though multiple studies estimate that if a rapid transitions were to be implemented in certain ways the number of full-time jobs formally recognized in the economy could increase overall – albeit not addressing topics such as retraining – at least temporarily due to the increased demand for labor to e.g. build public infrastructure and other "green jobs" to build the renewable energy system.[83][84][85] Even though accumulating evidence suggests that people who are living more environmentally friendly lifestyles are happier, according to a study "current strategies for encouraging lifestyle change aren't working".[86] Many of the measures that could decrease social stability could also decrease public political support and political stability or make such more difficult to maintain.

Public political support
Changes in interest in climate change, as measured by use of "climate change" as a Google search term.

Due to mechanisms of politics and possibly partly due to an earlier neglection of enacting required policies and relevant education of citizens via education systems and media, the urgency for and extent of policies, especially when seeking to facilitate lifestyle-changes and shifts on the scale of entire industries, could not only lead to social tension but also decrease levels of public support for political parties in power.[87][88] For instance, in contemporary socioeconomic structures keeping gas prices low is often "really good for the poor and the middle class".[89] This may make it more difficult or less rational for political parties to enact such decisions across the world in cases where the national, rather than international, level is adequate. Citizens often form their opinions based on peer opinions and media as well as according to their personal near-term interests. Endorsements of policies – which historically have often been highly suboptimal – that come from an untrusted source may lower citizens' policy support[90] and competing political campaigns and outreach, a key mechanism of politics, as well as online misinformation[91] may further exploit early public discontent with policies, especially when combined ubiquitously with other grave imperfections and ignorance of relevant political parties. The dilemma that links this problem to the concept of climate justice is that interests – in particular extrapolated interests based on scientific data and projections – of hypothetical yet-unborn generations are not suitably represented and considered in today's climate policy-making,[92] which is further complicated in that the already living young generations that will suffer most from climate change receive a politically equal voice and that large shares of voters generally do not have a good quality understanding of the projected likely effects of climate change and other relevant conditions. Public support could also be decreased by decisions for large financial transfers for the purpose of achieving climate justice, making this a challenging task including in cases where this money largely comes from taxing the general population rather than more select subgroups.[93]

Reduced efficiency
See also: Loss and damage

Some may see climate justice arguments for compensation by rich countries for disasters and similar problems in developing countries (as well as for domestic disasters) as a way for "limitless liability" by which at least high levels of compensations could drain a society's resources, efforts, focus and financial funds away from efficient preventive climate change mitigation towards e.g. immediate climate change relief compensations or climate-unrelated expenses of the receiving country or people.[94][95]

Conflicting interest-driven interpretations as barriers to agreements
See also: Group decision-making § Formal systems
Net income of the global oil and gas industry reached a record US$4 trillion in 2022.[96]
After recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic, energy company profits increased with greater revenues from higher fuel prices resulting from the Russian invasion of Ukraine, falling debt levels, tax write-downs of projects shut down in Russia, and backing off from earlier plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.[97] Record profits sparked public calls for windfall taxes.[97]

Substantially different interpretations and perspectives, arising from different interests, needs, circumstances, expectations, considerations and histories, can lead to substantially varying conceptions of what is "fair". Such may lead to countries effectively making it more difficult to reach an agreement, similar to the prisoner's dilemma.[98] Developing effective, legitimate, enforceable agreements could thereby be substantially complicated, especially if traditional ways or tools of policy-making are used, in-sum trusted third party expert authorities are absent and the scientific research base relevant for the decision-making – such as studies and data about the problem, potential mitigation measures and capacities – is not robust. Fundamental fairness principles include or could be:

  • Responsibility
  • Capability and
  • Rights (needs)

for which country characteristics can predict relative support.[99] The shared problem-characteristics of climate change could incentivize developing countries to act in concert to deter developed countries from "passing their climate costs onto them" and thereby improve the global mitigation effectiveness to 1.5 °C.[100]

Fossil-fuels dependent states
Further information: Fossil fuel phase-out § Assessment of extraction prevention responsibilities, and Carbon budget

Fossil fuel phase out are projected to affect states – and their citizens – with large or central industries of fossil-fuels extraction – including OPEC states – differently than other nations. It was found that they have obstructed climate negotiations and it was argued that many of them have large amounts of wealth due to which they should not need to receive financial support from other countries but could implement adequate transitions on their own in terms of financial resources.[101][102][103] A study found that governments of nations which have historically benefited from extraction should take the lead, with countries that have a high dependency on fossil fuels but low capacity for transition needing some support to follow.[104] In particular, transitional impacts of a rapid phase out of extraction is thought to be better absorbed in diversified, wealthier economies which should bear discrepancies in costs needed for a "just transition" as they are most able to bear it and may have better capacities for enacting absorptive socioeconomic policies.[105]

Less ambitious mitigation
Further information: Debate over China's economic responsibilities for climate change mitigation
The US, China and Russia have cumulatively contributed the greatest amounts of CO2 since 1850.[106]
Many of the heaviest users of fossil fuels rely on them for a high percentage of their electricity.[107]

There are concerns that climate justice could be used as an excuse or moral justification by developing, undeveloped or later-developed nations for less ambitious climate change mitigation goals as they have emitted less greenhouse gases in the past.[108]

History

Developed countries, as the main cause of climate change, in assuming their historical responsibility, must recognize and honor their climate debt in all of its dimensions as the basis for a just, effective, and scientific solution to climate change. (...) The focus must not be only on financial compensation, but also on restorative justice, understood as the restitution of integrity to our Mother Earth and all its beings.

World People's Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, People's Agreement, April 2010, Cochabamba, Bolivia[109]

Though the U.S.'s per capita and per GDP emissions have declined significantly, the raw numerical decline in emissions is much less substantial.[110] Growing populations and increased economic activity work against mitigation attempts.

The concept of climate justice was deeply influential on climate negotiations years before the term "climate justice" was regularly applied to the concept. In December 1990 the United Nations appointed an Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) to draft what became the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC), adopted at the UN Conference on the Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992.[111]  As the name “Environment and Development” indicated, the fundamental goal was to coordinate action on climate change with action on sustainable development. It was impossible to draft the text of the FCCC without confronting central questions of climate justice concerning how to share the responsibilities of slowing climate change fairly between developed nations and developing nations. 

The issue of the fair terms for sharing responsibility was raised forcefully for the INC by statements about climate justice from developing countries.[112] In response, the FCCC adopted the now-famous (and still-contentious) principles of climate justice embodied in Article 3.1:[113] "The Parties should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. Accordingly, the developed country Parties should take the lead in combating climate change and the adverse effects thereof."  The first principle of climate justice embedded in Article 3.1 is that calculations of benefits (and burdens) must include not only those for the present generation but also those for future generations. The second is that responsibilities are "common but differentiated", that is, every country has some responsibilities, but equitable responsibilities are different for different types of countries. The third is that a crucial instance of different responsibilities is that in fairness developed countries' responsibilities must be greater. How much greater continues to be debated politically.[114][115]

In 2000, at the same time as the Sixth Conference of the Parties (COP 6), the first Climate Justice Summit took place in The Hague. This summit aimed to "affirm that climate change is a rights issue" and to "build alliances across states and borders" against climate change and in favor of sustainable development.[116]

Subsequently, in August–September 2002, international environmental groups met in Johannesburg for the Earth Summit.[117] At this summit, also known as Rio+10, as it took place ten years after the 1992 Earth Summit, the Bali Principles of Climate Justice[118] were adopted.

Climate Justice affirms the rights of communities dependent on natural resources for their livelihood and cultures to own and manage the same in a sustainable manner, and is opposed to the commodification of nature and its resources.

Bali Principles of Climate Justice, article 18, August 29, 2002[118]

In 2004, the Durban Group for Climate Justice was formed at an international meeting in Durban, South Africa. Here representatives from NGOs and peoples' movements discussed realistic policies for addressing climate change.[119]

In 2007 at the 13th Conference of the Parties (COP 13) in Bali, the global coalition Climate Justice Now! was founded, and, in 2008, the Global Humanitarian Forum focused on climate justice at its inaugural meeting in Geneva.[120]

In 2009, the Climate Justice Action Network was formed during the run-up to the Copenhagen Summit.[121] It proposed civil disobedience and direct action during the summit, and many climate activists used the slogan 'system change not climate change'.[122]

In April 2010, the World People's Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth took place in Tiquipaya, Bolivia. It was hosted by the government of Bolivia as a global gathering of civil society and governments. The conference published a "People's Agreement" calling, among other things, for greater climate justice.[109]

In September 2013 the Climate Justice Dialogue convened by the Mary Robinson Foundation and the World Resources Institute released their Declaration on Climate Justice in an appeal to those drafting the proposed agreement to be negotiated at COP-21 in Paris in 2015.[123]

In December 2018, the People's Demands for Climate Justice, signed by 292,000 individuals and 366 organizations, called upon government delegates at COP24 to comply with a list of six climate justice demands.[124] One of the demands was to "Ensure developed countries honor their “Fair Shares” for largely fueling this crisis."

Some advance was achieved at the Paris climate finance summit at June 2023. The World Bank allowed to low income countries temporarily stop paying debts if they are hit by climate disaster. Most of financial help to climate vulnerable countries is coming in the form of debts, what often worsens the situation as those countries are overburdened with debts. Around 300 billion dollars was pledged as financial help in the next years, but trillions are needed to really solve the problem.[125][126] More than 100 leading economists signed a letter calling for an extreme wealth tax as a solution (2% tax can generate around 2.5 trillion). It can serve as a Loss and damage mechanism as the 1% of richest people is responsible for twice as many emissions as the poorest 50%.[127]

Examples

Subsistence farmers in Latin America

Several studies that investigated the impacts of climate change on agriculture in Latin America suggest that in the poorer countries of Latin America, agriculture composes the most important economic sector and the primary form of sustenance for small farmers.[128][129] Maize is the only grain still produced as a sustenance crop on small farms in Latin American nations.[128] The projected decrease of this grain and other crops can threaten the welfare and the economic development of subsistence communities in Latin America.[130][128] Food security is of particular concern to rural areas that have weak or non-existent food markets to rely on in the case food shortages.[131] In August 2019, Honduras declared a state of emergency when a drought caused the southern part of the country to lose 72% of its corn and 75% of its beans. Food security issues are expected to worsen across Central America due to climate change. It is predicted that by 2070, corn yields in Central America may fall by 10%, beans by 29%, and rice by 14%. With Central American crop consumption dominated by corn (70%), beans (25%), and rice (6%), the expected drop in staple crop yields could have devastating consequences.[132]

The expected impacts of climate change on subsistence farmers in Latin America and other developing regions are unjust for two reasons.[129][133] First, subsistence farmers in developing countries, including those in Latin America are disproportionately vulnerable to climate change[133] Second, these nations were the least responsible for causing the problem of anthropogenic induced climate.[133]

Disproportionate vulnerability to climate disasters is socially determined.[129][133] For example, socioeconomic and policy trends affecting smallholder and subsistence farmers limit their capacity to adapt to change.[129] A history of policies and economic dynamics has negatively impacted rural farmers.[128] During the 1950s and through the 1980s, high inflation and appreciated real exchange rates reduced the value of agricultural exports.[128] As a result, farmers in Latin America received lower prices for their products compared to world market prices.[128] Following these outcomes, Latin American policies and national crop programs aimed to stimulate agricultural intensification.[128] These national crop programs benefitted larger commercial farmers more. In the 1980s and 1990s low world market prices for cereals and livestock resulted in decreased agricultural growth and increased rural poverty.[128]

Perceived vulnerability to climate change differs even within communities, as in the example of subsistence farmers in Calakmul, Mexico.[134]

Adaptive planning is challenged by the difficulty of predicting local scale climate change impacts.[129] A crucial component to adaptation should include government efforts to lessen the effects of food shortages and famines.[135] Planning for equitable adaptation and agricultural sustainability will require the engagement of farmers in decision making processes.[135]

Hurricane Katrina
Further information: Tropical cyclones and climate change
A house is crushed and swept off its foundations by flooding from a breached levee in the Ninth Ward, New Orleans, Louisiana, due to a storm surge from Hurricane Katrina. The Ninth Ward has about a 90% Black population.

Because of climate change, tropical cyclones are expected to increase in intensity and have increased rainfall, and have larger storm surges, but there might be fewer of them globally. These changes are driven by rising sea temperatures and increased maximum water vapour content of the atmosphere as the air heats up.[136] Hurricane Katrina in 2005 provided insights into how climate change disasters affect different people individually,[137] as it had a disproportionate effect on low-income and minority groups.[137] A study on the race and class dimensions of Hurricane Katrina suggests that those most vulnerable include poor, black, brown, elderly, sick, and homeless people.[138] Low-income and black communities had little resources and limited mobility to evacuate before the storm.[139][140] Also, after the hurricane, low-income communities were most affected by contamination,[137] and this was made worse by the fact that government relief measures failed to adequately assist those most at risk.[141][138]

See also

References
  1. Isabella Kaminski (20 December 2019). "Dutch supreme court upholds landmark ruling demanding climate action". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 20 December 2019. Retrieved 20 December 2019.
  2. "What is Climate Justice?". Global Witness. Retrieved 25 October 2023. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  3. Schlosberg, David; Collins, Lisette B. (2014-05). "From environmental to climate justice: climate change and the discourse of environmental justice". WIREs Climate Change. 5 (3): 359–374. doi:10.1002/wcc.275. ISSN 1757-7780. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  4. Manzo, Rosa (19 March 2021). "Climate Equity or Climate Justice? More than a question of terminology". International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Archived from the original on 28 September 2022.
  5. "Climate Law Database". Climate Justice Programme. Archived from the original on 9 April 2011.
  6. Jolly, Patricia (9 October 2018). "Les Pays-Bas sommés par la justice d'intensifier leur lutte contre le changement climatique" [The Netherlands ordered by the courts to step up its fight against climate change]. Le Monde (in French). Archived from the original on 12 October 2018. Retrieved 18 October 2018.
  7. Newell, Peter; Srivastava, Shilpi; Naess, Lars Otto; Torres Contreras, Gerardo A.; Price, Roz (July 2020). "Towards Transformative Climate Justice: Key Challenges and Future Directions for Research" (PDF). Working Paper Volume 2020. Sussex, UK: Institute for Development Studies (540). hdl:20.500.12413/15497. Archived (PDF) from the original on 16 November 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2022.
  8. Tan, Mitzi Jonelle; Ravi, Disha A.; Muñoz, Laura Veronica; Weintraub, Eyal; Becker, Nicole; Mtai, Kevin (9 November 2020). "As young people, we urge financial institutions to stop financing fossil fuels". Climate Home News. Archived from the original on 9 November 2020. Retrieved 31 January 2021.
  9. Climate Change and LandAn IPCC Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems. Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change. 2019. p. 17.
  10. "Kofi Annan launches climate justice campaign track". Global Humanitarian Forum. 1 October 2009. Archived from the original on 15 July 2011. Retrieved 11 May 2022.
  11. Koch, Wendy (7 March 2011). "Study: Climate change affects those least responsible". USA Today. Archived from the original on 7 December 2015.
  12. "Africa Speaks up on Climate Change". Archived from the original on 19 December 2018. In wealthy countries, the looming climate crisis is a matter of concern, as it will affect the wellbeing of the economy. But in Africa, which is hardly contributing to climate change in the first place, it will be a matter of life and death.
  13. Policy Innovations for Transformative Change: Implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (PDF) (Report). Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD). 2016. ISBN 9789290850984. Archived (PDF) from the original on 19 May 2022. Retrieved 11 May 2022.
  14. Jafry, Tahseen, ed. (2019). Routledge handbook of climate justice. Abingdon, Oxon. ISBN 9781315537689. OCLC 1056201868.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  15. Cameron, Edward; Shine, Tara; Bevins, Wendi (September 2013). "Climate Justice: Equity and justice informing a new climate agreement" (PDF). Working Paper. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute & Mary Robinson Foundation. Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 25 November 2020.
  16. Powers, Melissa (4 December 2019). "Energy transition: reforming social metabolism". Research Handbook on Global Climate Constitutionalism. doi:10.4337/9781788115810.00020. ISBN 9781788115810. S2CID 213458540.
  17. Newell, Peter; Mulvaney, Dustin (2013). "The political economy of the 'just transition'". The Geographical Journal. 179 (2): 132–140. doi:10.1111/geoj.12008. ISSN 1475-4959.
  18. Ciplet, David; Harrison, Jill Lindsey (15 April 2020). "Transition tensions: mapping conflicts in movements for a just and sustainable transition". Environmental Politics. 29 (3): 435–456. doi:10.1080/09644016.2019.1595883. ISSN 0964-4016. S2CID 159439879.
  19. "Five ways to achieve climate justice". The Guardian. 12 January 2015. Archived from the original on 29 October 2021. Retrieved 29 October 2021.
  20. McKendry, Corina (15 November 2016). McKendry, Corina (ed.). "Participation, Power and the Politics of Multiscalar Climate Justice". The WSPC Reference on Natural Resources and Environmental Policy in the Era of Global Change. WORLD SCIENTIFIC. 2: 393–413. doi:10.1142/9789813208162_0017. ISBN 978-981-4713-72-6.
  21. "Climate change and social justice: an evidence review". JRF. 11 February 2014. Archived from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 29 October 2021.
  22. "AR6 Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability — IPCC". Archived from the original on 18 March 2022. Retrieved 18 March 2022.
  23. "Historical GHG Emissions / Global Historical Emissions". ClimateWatchData.org. Climate Watch. 2021. Archived from the original on 21 May 2021. ● Population data from "List of the populations of the world's countries, dependencies, and territories". britannica.com. Encyclopedia Britannica. Archived from the original on 26 June 2021.
  24. Chart based on: Milman, Oliver (12 July 2022). "Nearly $2tn of damage inflicted on other countries by US emissions". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 12 July 2022. Guardian cites Callahan, Christopher W.; Mankin, Justin S. (12 July 2022). "National attribution of historical climate damages". Climatic Change. 172 (40): 40. Bibcode:2022ClCh..172...40C. doi:10.1007/s10584-022-03387-y. S2CID 250430339.
  25. Collective, Building Bridges (July 2010). Space for Movement: Reflections from Bolivia on climate justice, social movements and the state (PDF). ISBN 9780853162940. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 August 2016. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help)
  26. "Is a Successful Ecological Turnaround of Capitalism Possible?". Archived from the original on 17 December 2018. Retrieved 6 April 2016.
  27. Mitchell, Timothy (2011). Carbon democracy : political power in the age of oil. London. ISBN 978-1-84467-896-9. OCLC 882609648. Archived from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 20 March 2022.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  28. Newell, Peter; Srivastava, Shilpi; Naess, Lars Otto; Contreras, Gerardo A. Torres; Price, Roz (2021). "Toward transformative climate justice: An emerging research agenda". WIREs Climate Change. 12 (6): e733. doi:10.1002/wcc.733. ISSN 1757-7799. S2CID 238789301. Archived from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 16 November 2021.
  29. Sardo, Michael Christopher (14 September 2020). "Responsibility for climate justice: Political not moral". European Journal of Political Theory. 22: 26–50. doi:10.1177/1474885120955148. ISSN 1474-8851. S2CID 224971164.
  30. Goh, Kian (2 April 2020). "Planning the Green New Deal: Climate Justice and the Politics of Sites and Scales". Journal of the American Planning Association. 86 (2): 188–195. doi:10.1080/01944363.2019.1688671. ISSN 0194-4363. S2CID 212762011.
  31. Aitken M, Christman B, Bonaventura M, van der Horst D, Holbrook J (2016). "Climate Justice Begins at Home: Conceptual, Pragmatic and Transformative Approaches to Climate Justice in Scotland". Scottish Affairs. 25 (2): 225–252. doi:10.3366/SCOT.2016.0128. hdl:20.500.11820/9385e844-d046-41db-80e9-6c8e68d3e3dd. Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 30 May 2022.
  32. "Emissions Gap Report 2020 / Executive Summary" (PDF). United Nations Environment Programme. 2021. p. XV Fig. ES.8. Archived (PDF) from the original on 31 July 2021.
  33. Cozzi, Laura; Chen, Olivia; Kim, Hyeji (22 February 2023). "The world's top 1% of emitters produce over 1000 times more CO2 than the bottom 1%". iea.org. International Energy Agency (IEA). Archived from the original on 3 March 2023. "Methodological note: ... The analysis accounts for energy-related CO2, and not other greenhouse gases, nor those related to land use and agriculture."
  34. Stevens, Harry (1 March 2023). "The United States has caused the most global warming. When will China pass it?". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 1 March 2023.
  35. Wiedmann, Thomas; Lenzen, Manfred; Keyßer, Lorenz T.; Steinberger, Julia K. (19 June 2020). "Scientists' warning on affluence". Nature Communications. 11 (1): 3107. Bibcode:2020NatCo..11.3107W. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-16941-y. ISSN 2041-1723. PMC 7305220. PMID 32561753.
  36. Nielsen, Kristian S.; Nicholas, Kimberly A.; Creutzig, Felix; Dietz, Thomas; Stern, Paul C. (30 September 2021). "The role of high-socioeconomic-status people in locking in or rapidly reducing energy-driven greenhouse gas emissions". Nature Energy. 6 (11): 1011–1016. Bibcode:2021NatEn...6.1011N. doi:10.1038/s41560-021-00900-y. ISSN 2058-7546. S2CID 244191460.
  37. Gore, Tim (23 September 2020). "Confronting carbon inequality". Oxfam International. Archived from the original on 24 March 2022. Retrieved 20 March 2022.
  38. Kartha, Sivan; Kemp-Benedict, Eric; Ghosh, Emily; Nazareth, Anisha; Gore, Tim (September 2020). "The Carbon Inequality Era: An assessment of the global distribution of consumption emissions among individuals from 1990 to 2015 and beyond" (PDF). Stockholm Environment Institute. Archived (PDF) from the original on 22 January 2022. Retrieved 11 May 2022.
  39. Clifford, Catherine (26 January 2021). "The '1%' are the main drivers of climate change, but it hits the poor the hardest: Oxfam report". CNBC. Archived from the original on 28 October 2021. Retrieved 28 October 2021.
  40. Berkhout, Esmé; Galasso, Nick; Lawson, Max; Rivero Morales, Pablo Andrés; Taneja, Anjela; Vázquez Pimentel, Diego Alejo (25 January 2021). "The Inequality Virus". Oxfam International. Archived from the original on 28 October 2021. Retrieved 28 October 2021.
  41. Paddison, Laura (28 October 2021). "How the rich are driving climate change". BBC. Archived from the original on 5 November 2021. Retrieved 7 November 2021.
  42. Oswald, Yannick; Owen, Anne; Steinberger, Julia K. (March 2020). "Large inequality in international and intranational energy footprints between income groups and across consumption categories" (PDF). Nature Energy. 5 (3): 231–239. Bibcode:2020NatEn...5..231O. doi:10.1038/s41560-020-0579-8. ISSN 2058-7546. S2CID 216245301. Archived (PDF) from the original on 28 October 2021. Retrieved 16 November 2021.
  43. "Climate change: More than 3bn could live in extreme heat by 2070". BBC News. 5 May 2020. Archived from the original on 5 May 2020. Retrieved 6 May 2020.
  44. Xu, Chi; Kohler, Timothy A.; Lenton, Timothy M.; Svenning, Jens-Christian; Scheffer, Marten (26 May 2020). "Future of the human climate niche – Supplementary Materials". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 117 (21): 11350–11355. Bibcode:2020PNAS..11711350X. doi:10.1073/pnas.1910114117. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 7260949. PMID 32366654.
  45. "Global Warming May Result in a Billion Premature Deaths by 2100: Study | Weather.com". The Weather Channel. Retrieved 10 September 2023.
  46. Pearce, Joshua M.; Parncutt, Richard (2023). "Quantifying Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Human Deaths to Guide Energy Policy". Energies. 16 (16): 6074. doi:10.3390/en16166074. ISSN 1996-1073.
  47. Fragnière, Augustin (2016). "Climate change and individual duties". WIREs Climate Change. 7 (6): 798–814. doi:10.1002/wcc.422. ISSN 1757-7799. S2CID 156177435.
  48. Thaller, Annina; Fleiß, Eva; Brudermann, Thomas (1 December 2020). "No glory without sacrifice — drivers of climate (in)action in the general population". Environmental Science & Policy. 114: 7–13. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2020.07.014. ISSN 1462-9011. S2CID 225022617.
  49. Puaschunder, Julia M. (7 May 2017). "Climate in the 21st Century: A Macroeconomic Model of Fair Global Warming Benefits Distribution to Grant Climate Justice Around the World and over Time". Proceedings of the 8th International RAIS Conference on Social Sciences and Humanities Organized by Research Association for Interdisciplinary Studies (RAIS). doi:10.2139/ssrn.2964385. hdl:10125/51976. S2CID 157469780. SSRN 2964385.
  50. Gramling, Carolyn (1 October 2021). "2020 babies may suffer up to seven times as many extreme heat waves as 1960s kids". Science News. Archived from the original on 11 May 2022. Retrieved 18 October 2021.
  51. Thiery, Wim; Lange, Stefan; Rogelj, Joeri; Schleussner, Carl-Friedrich; Gudmundsson, Lukas; Seneviratne, Sonia I.; Andrijevic, Marina; Frieler, Katja; Emanuel, Kerry; Geiger, Tobias; Bresch, David N.; Zhao, Fang; Willner, Sven N.; Büchner, Matthias; Volkholz, Jan; Bauer, Nico; Chang, Jinfeng; Ciais, Philippe; Dury, Marie; François, Louis; Grillakis, Manolis; Gosling, Simon N.; Hanasaki, Naota; Hickler, Thomas; Huber, Veronika; Ito, Akihiko; Jägermeyr, Jonas; Khabarov, Nikolay; Koutroulis, Aristeidis; Liu, Wenfeng; Lutz, Wolfgang; Mengel, Matthias; Müller, Christoph; Ostberg, Sebastian; Reyer, Christopher P. O.; Stacke, Tobias; Wada, Yoshihide (8 October 2021). "Intergenerational inequities in exposure to climate extremes". Science. 374 (6564): 158–160. Bibcode:2021Sci...374..158T. doi:10.1126/science.abi7339. PMID 34565177. S2CID 237942847. Archived from the original on 11 May 2022. Retrieved 28 October 2021.
  52. Lenton, Timothy M.; Rockström, Johan; Gaffney, Owen; Rahmstorf, Stefan; Richardson, Katherine; Steffen, Will; Schellnhuber, Hans Joachim (28 November 2019). "Climate tipping points — too risky to bet against". Nature. 575 (7784): 592–595. Bibcode:2019Natur.575..592L. doi:10.1038/d41586-019-03595-0. hdl:10871/40141. ISSN 0028-0836. PMID 31776487. S2CID 208330359. Archived from the original on 19 March 2022. Retrieved 18 March 2022.
  53. Fountain, Henry (7 March 2022). "Amazon Is Less Able to Recover From Droughts and Logging, Study Finds". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on 18 March 2022. Retrieved 18 March 2022.
  54. Shue, Henry (2021). The pivotal generation : why we have a moral responsibility to slow climate change right now. Princeton, New Jersey. ISBN 978-0-691-22007-9. OCLC 1245960372. Archived from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 18 March 2022.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  55. Islam, S. Nazrul; Winkel, John (2017). Climate Change and Social Inequality (PDF). New York: UN DESA. Archived (PDF) from the original on 16 January 2019. Retrieved 31 October 2019.
  56. Baird, Rachel (April 2008). "Impact of Climate Change on Minorities and Indigenous Peoples" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 20 May 2019.
  57. Robinson, Mary (2018). Climate justice : hope, resilience, and the fight for a sustainable future. New York. ISBN 978-1-63286-928-9. OCLC 1019922693. Archived from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 19 March 2022.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  58. Fourth National Climate Assessment (Report). U.S. Global Change Research Program. 2018. pp. 1–470. Archived from the original on 30 December 2018. Retrieved 31 October 2019.
  59. Pearson, Adam R.; Ballew, Matthew T.; Naiman, Sarah; Schuldt, Jonathon P. (26 April 2017). "Race, Class, Gender and Climate Change Communication". Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.412. ISBN 9780190228620. Archived from the original on 11 March 2020. Retrieved 31 October 2019.
  60. Fourth National Climate Assessment. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Report). Archived from the original on 27 October 2019.
  61. "Indigenous Peoples Disproportionately Impacted by Climate Change, Systematically Targeted for Defending Freedoms, Speakers Tell Permanent Forum | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases". www.un.org. 18 April 2018. Archived from the original on 31 October 2019. Retrieved 31 October 2019.
  62. Jordans, Frank (29 April 2021). "Court: Germany must share climate burden between young, old". Associated Press. Archived from the original on 29 April 2021. ● "Verfassungsbeschwerden gegen das Klimaschutzgesetz teilweise erfolgreich (Constitutional complaints against the Climate Protection Act partially successful)". bundesverfassungsgericht.de (in German). Bundesverfassungsgerichts (Federal Constitutional Court). 29 April 2021. Archived from the original on 3 May 2021.
  63. "CASO No. 1149-19-JP/20". CorteConstitucional.gob.ec (in Spanish). Constitutional Court of Ecuador. 10 November 2021. pp. VI. Conclusiones. Archived from the original on 2 December 2021.
  64. Surma, Katie (3 December 2021). "Ecuador's High Court Affirms Constitutional Protections for the Rights of Nature in a Landmark Decision". Inside Climate News. Archived from the original on 3 December 2021. In a case involving mining in a protected region of the Ecuadorian rainforest, the Constitutional Court of Ecuador issued a landmark decision interpreting the country’s constitutional provisions to grant rights and confer protections to ecosystems.
  65. Caney, Simon (2021). "Climate Justice". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2021 ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Archived from the original on 18 March 2022. Retrieved 18 March 2022.
  66. Grasso, Marco; Heede, Richard (19 May 2023). "Time to pay the piper: Fossil fuel companies' reparations for climate damages". One Earth. 6 (5): 459–463. Bibcode:2023OEart...6..459G. doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2023.04.012. S2CID 258809532.
  67. Caney, Simon (2014). "Two Kinds of Climate Justice: Avoiding Harm and Sharing Burdens". Journal of Political Philosophy. 22 (2): 125–149. doi:10.1111/jopp.12030. ISSN 1467-9760.
  68. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law (2023). "Global Climate Litigation Report / 2023 Status Review" (PDF). p. XIV. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 July 2023.
  69. King; Mallett, Wood Mallesons-Daisy; Nagra, Sati (27 February 2020). "Climate change litigation - what is it and what to expect? | Lexology". www.lexology.com. Retrieved 20 September 2020.
  70. Pasquale Viola (29 March 2022). Climate Constitutionalism Momentum: Adaptive Legal Systems. Springer Nature. ISBN 978-3-03-097336-0.
  71. Orangias, Joseph (1 December 2021). "Towards global public trust doctrines: an analysis of the transnationalisation of state stewardship duties". Transnational Legal Theory. 12 (4): 550–586. doi:10.1080/20414005.2021.2006030. S2CID 244864136.
  72. van der Zee, Bibi; Batty, David (12 December 2009). "Copenhagen climate protesters rally". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 20 March 2018.
  73. Washington Post Staff (13 November 2021). "The Glasgow climate pact, annotated". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 14 November 2021.
  74. Stephen Humphreys, ed. (2010). Human rights and climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-511-76998-6. OCLC 652432164.
  75. "New UN Report Details Link between Climate Change and Human Rights". UN Environment. 5 October 2017. Retrieved 20 March 2022.
  76. "Report of the Human Rights Council on its thirty-first session. Advance unedited version". Human Rights Council. 22 July 2016. Retrieved 17 August 2022.
  77. Rajamani, Lavanya (26 June 2019). "Integrating Human Rights in the Paris Climate Architecture: Contest, Context, and Consequence". Climate Law. 9 (3): 180–201. doi:10.1163/18786561-00903003. ISSN 1878-6553. S2CID 199289341.
  78. "AR6 Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability — IPCC". Retrieved 20 March 2022.
  79. Martin, Mathilde; Islar, Mine (1 March 2021). "The 'end of the world' vs. the 'end of the month': understanding social resistance to sustainability transition agendas, a lesson from the Yellow Vests in France". Sustainability Science. 16 (2): 601–614. doi:10.1007/s11625-020-00877-9. ISSN 1862-4057. S2CID 226303592.
  80. Brown, Benjamin; Spiegel, Samuel J. (1 May 2019). "Coal, Climate Justice, and the Cultural Politics of Energy Transition". Global Environmental Politics. 19 (2): 149–168. doi:10.1162/glep_a_00501. ISSN 1526-3800. S2CID 207550608.
  81. Deane-Drummond, Celia (1 February 2011). "A Case for Collective Conscience: Climategate, COP-15 and Climate Justice". Studies in Christian Ethics. 24 (1): 5–22. doi:10.1177/0953946810389115. ISSN 0953-9468. S2CID 147522198.
  82. Kalt, Tobias (24 February 2021). "Jobs vs. climate justice? Contentious narratives of labor and climate movements in the coal transition in Germany". Environmental Politics. 30 (7): 1135–1154. doi:10.1080/09644016.2021.1892979. ISSN 0964-4016. S2CID 233917142.
  83. Ram, Manish; Osorio-Aravena, Juan Carlos; Aghahosseini, Arman; Bogdanov, Dmitrii; Breyer, Christian (1 January 2022). "Job creation during a climate compliant global energy transition across the power, heat, transport, and desalination sectors by 2050". Energy. 238: 121690. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2021.121690. ISSN 0360-5442.
  84. Dell’Anna, Federico (1 February 2021). "Green jobs and energy efficiency as strategies for economic growth and the reduction of environmental impacts". Energy Policy. 149: 112031. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2020.112031. ISSN 0301-4215. S2CID 230525373.
  85. Jacobson, Mark Z.; Delucchi, Mark A.; Cameron, Mary A.; Coughlin, Stephen J.; Hay, Catherine A.; Manogaran, Indu Priya; Shu, Yanbo; von Krauland, Anna-Katharina (20 December 2019). "Impacts of Green New Deal Energy Plans on Grid Stability, Costs, Jobs, Health, and Climate in 143 Countries". One Earth. 1 (4): 449–463. Bibcode:2019AGUFMPA32A..01J. doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2019.12.003. ISSN 2590-3322. S2CID 210964561.
  86. Prinzing, Michael (7 November 2020). "Going Green Is Good for You: Why We Need to Change the Way We Think about Pro-environmental Behavior". Ethics, Policy & Environment. 26: 1–18. doi:10.1080/21550085.2020.1848192. ISSN 2155-0085. S2CID 228897551.
  87. Drews, Stefan; van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M. (2 October 2016). "What explains public support for climate policies? A review of empirical and experimental studies". Climate Policy. 16 (7): 855–876. Bibcode:2016CliPo..16..855D. doi:10.1080/14693062.2015.1058240. ISSN 1469-3062. S2CID 155760317.
  88. Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle (1 July 2011). "Citizens as veto players: climate change policy and the constraints of direct democracy". Environmental Politics. 20 (4): 485–507. doi:10.1080/09644016.2011.589577. ISSN 0964-4016. S2CID 155026745.
  89. "The moral element of climate change". Stanford News. University of Stanford. 23 February 2017. Archived from the original on 7 November 2021. Retrieved 7 November 2021.
  90. Rinscheid, Adrian; Pianta, Silvia; Weber, Elke U. (October 2021). "What shapes public support for climate change mitigation policies? The role of descriptive social norms and elite cues" (PDF). Behavioural Public Policy. 5 (4): 503–527. doi:10.1017/bpp.2020.43. ISSN 2398-063X. S2CID 228915985. Archived (PDF) from the original on 19 May 2022. Retrieved 6 April 2022.
  91. Treen, Kathie M. d'I; Williams, Hywel T. P.; O'Neill, Saffron J. (2020). "Online misinformation about climate change". WIREs Climate Change. 11 (5): e665. doi:10.1002/wcc.665. ISSN 1757-7799. S2CID 221879878.
  92. Gonzalez-Ricoy, Inigo; Rey, Felipe (2019). "Enfranchising the future: Climate justice and the representation of future generations". WIREs Climate Change. 10 (5): e598. doi:10.1002/wcc.598. ISSN 1757-7799. S2CID 197563077. Archived from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 6 April 2022.
  93. Tindall, David (5 November 2021). "When will climate justice be served?". Canada's National Observer. Archived from the original on 6 November 2021. Retrieved 6 November 2021.
  94. Mathiesen, Karl (20 November 2013). "Climate talks: Should rich countries pay for damage caused by global warming?". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 3 November 2021.
  95. Kopra, Sanna (November 2019). "Responsibility for climate justice: the role of great powers" (PDF). University of Helsinki. hdl:10138/314725. Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 November 2021. Retrieved 3 November 2021.
  96. "World Energy Investment 2023" (PDF). IEA.org. International Energy Agency. May 2023. p. 61. Archived (PDF) from the original on 7 August 2023.
  97. Bousso, Ron (8 February 2023). "Big Oil doubles profits in blockbuster 2022". Reuters. Archived from the original on 31 March 2023. ● Details for 2020 from the more detailed diagram in King, Ben (12 February 2023). "Why are BP, Shell, and other oil giants making so much money right now?". BBC. Archived from the original on 22 April 2023.
  98. Okamoto, Sanae; Sluismans, Raf. "COP26: The psychological game behind a successful negotiation". phys.org. Archived from the original on 8 November 2021. Retrieved 8 November 2021.
  99. Tørstad, Vegard; Sælen, Håkon (28 May 2018). "Fairness in the climate negotiations: what explains variation in parties' expressed conceptions?". Climate Policy. 18 (5): 642–654. Bibcode:2018CliPo..18..642T. doi:10.1080/14693062.2017.1341372. hdl:1814/48265. ISSN 1469-3062. S2CID 158916051.
  100. Ertürk, Korkut Alp; Whittle, Jason (2015). "Climate Change, Procrastination and Asymmetric Power" (PDF). World Economic Review. 2015 (5): 1–40. Archived (PDF) from the original on 5 November 2021. Retrieved 8 November 2021.
  101. Muttitt, Greg; Kartha, Sivan (13 September 2020). "Equity, climate justice and fossil fuel extraction: principles for a managed phase out" (PDF). Climate Policy. 20 (8): 1024–1042. Bibcode:2020CliPo..20.1024M. doi:10.1080/14693062.2020.1763900. ISSN 1469-3062. S2CID 219681770. Archived (PDF) from the original on 8 November 2021. Retrieved 8 November 2021.
  102. Funnell, Dominica (4 November 2021). "Australia dodges pledge to phase out coal by 2030s". SkyNews. Archived from the original on 7 November 2021. Retrieved 8 November 2021.
  103. "COP26: Document leak reveals nations lobbying to change key climate report". BBC News. 21 October 2021. Archived from the original on 2 November 2021. Retrieved 8 November 2021.
  104. Welsby, Dan; Price, James; Pye, Steve; Ekins, Paul (September 2021). "Unextractable fossil fuels in a 1.5 °C world". Nature. 597 (7875): 230–234. Bibcode:2021Natur.597..230W. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03821-8. ISSN 1476-4687. PMID 34497394. S2CID 237455006.
  105. Muttitt, Greg; Kartha, Sivan (13 September 2020). "Equity, climate justice and fossil fuel extraction: principles for a managed phase out". Climate Policy. 20 (8): 1024–1042. Bibcode:2020CliPo..20.1024M. doi:10.1080/14693062.2020.1763900. ISSN 1469-3062. S2CID 219681770.
  106. Evans, Simon (5 October 2021). "Analysis: Which countries are historically responsible for climate change? / Historical responsibility for climate change is at the heart of debates over climate justice". CarbonBrief.org. Carbon Brief. Archived from the original on 26 October 2021. Source: Carbon Brief analysis of figures from the Global Carbon Project, CDIAC, Our World in Data, Carbon Monitor, Houghton and Nassikas (2017) and Hansis et al (2015).
  107. Data: BP Statistical Review of World Energy, and Ember Climate (3 November 2021). "Electricity consumption from fossil fuels, nuclear and renewables, 2020". OurWorldInData.org. Our World in Data consolidated data from BP and Ember. Archived from the original on 3 November 2021.
  108. "China will take one-third of carbon space by 2030, India 7%, says CSE". Hindustan Times. 30 October 2021. Archived from the original on 2 November 2021. Retrieved 3 November 2021.
  109. World People's Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth April 22nd, Cochabamba, Bolivia - People's Agreement (Report). World People's Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth. 22 April 2010. Archived from the original on 19 December 2019. Retrieved 20 December 2019.
  110. "Climate Change Indicators: U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions / Figure 3. U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions per Capita and per Dollar of GDP, 1990–2020". EPA.gov. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 27 June 2016. Archived from the original on 5 April 2023.
  111. Bolin, Bert (2007). A history of the science and politics of climate change : the role of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Bert Bolin. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. p. 69. ISBN 978-0-521-08873-2. OCLC 1058098098.
  112. Agarwal, Anil; Narain, Sunita (21 November 2019). Global Warming in an Unequal World: A Case of Environmental Colonialism. pp. 81–91. doi:10.1093/oso/9780199498734.003.0005. ISBN 978-0-19-949873-4. Archived from the original on 9 March 2022. Retrieved 9 March 2022. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help)
  113. "UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE" (PDF). 1992. Archived (PDF) from the original on 7 May 2022. Retrieved 9 March 2022.
  114. Cripps, Elizabeth (2022). What climate justice means and why we should care. London. ISBN 978-1-4729-9183-6. OCLC 1295438411.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  115. Moellendorf, Darrel (2022). Mobilizing hope : climate change and global poverty. New York, NY. ISBN 978-0-19-087561-9. OCLC 1285485609.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  116. "Alternative Summit Opens with Call for Climate Justice". CorpWatch. 19 November 2000. Archived from the original on 19 April 2016.
  117. "WORLD SUMMIT ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (WSSD): JOHANNESBURG, AUGUST 26 - SEPTEMBER 4, 2002". worldsummit2002.org. Heinrich Böll Foundation. Archived from the original on 30 September 2002.
  118. Bali Principles of Climate Justice (PDF). EJNet.org (Report). 29 August 2002. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 April 2016. Retrieved 20 December 2019.
  119. "Durban Group for Climate Justice". Transnational Institute. 6 July 2009. Archived from the original on 18 April 2016. Retrieved 6 April 2016.
  120. "The Global Humanitarian Forum Annual Meeting 2008". Archived from the original on 15 January 2010. Retrieved 28 June 2017.
  121. "Climate Change and Justice: On the road to Copenhagen". Heinrich Böll Foundation. Archived from the original on 21 December 2018.
  122. "100,000 March for System Change not climate change in Copenhagen with mass arrests". Indymedia. 13 December 2009. Archived from the original on 1 December 2018.
  123. "Mary Robinson Foundation – Climate Justice | Climate Justice Dialogue". www.mrfcj.org. Archived from the original on 17 February 2022. Retrieved 18 March 2022.
  124. "The People's Demands for Climate Justice". The People's Demands for Climate Justice. Archived from the original on 8 December 2018. Retrieved 8 December 2018.
  125. Harvey, Fiona (22 June 2023). "World Bank offers developing countries debt pauses if hit by climate crisis". The Guardian. Retrieved 28 June 2023.
  126. Anderson, Stefan (26 June 2023). "Paris Climate Finance Summit Unlocks Funding, Dodges Debt". Health policy watch. Retrieved 28 June 2023.
  127. Harvey, Fiona (19 June 2023). "A wealth tax could help poorer countries tackle climate crisis, economists say". The Guardian. Retrieved 28 June 2023.
  128. Baethgen WE (1997). "Vulnerability of the agricultural sector of Latin America to climate change" (PDF). Climate Research. 9: 1–7. Bibcode:1997ClRes...9....1B. doi:10.3354/cr009001. Archived (PDF) from the original on 11 May 2022. Retrieved 11 March 2022.
  129. Morton JF (December 2007). "The impact of climate change on smallholder and subsistence agriculture". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 104 (50): 19680–5. doi:10.1073/pnas.0701855104. PMC 2148357. PMID 18077400.
  130. Jones P, Thornton P (April 2003). "The potential impacts of climate change on maize production in Africa and Latin America in 2055". Global Environmental Change. 13 (1): 51–59. doi:10.1016/S0959-3780(02)00090-0.
  131. Timmons Roberts, J. (December 2009). "The International Dimension of Climate Justice and the Need for International Adaptation Funding". Environmental Justice. 2 (4): 185–190. doi:10.1089/env.2009.0029.
  132. Masters, Jeff (23 December 2019). "Fifth Straight Year of Central American Drought Helping Drive Migration". Scientific American. Archived from the original on 7 June 2021. Retrieved 1 June 2021.
  133. Davies M, Guenther B, Leavy J, Mitchell T, Tanner T (February 2009). "Climate Change Adaptation, Disaster Risk Reduction and Social Protection: Complementary Roles in Agriculture and Rural Growth?". IDS Working Papers. 2009 (320): 01–37. doi:10.1111/j.2040-0209.2009.00320_2.x. Archived from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 11 March 2022.
  134. Green, Lisa; Schmook, Birgit; Radel, Claudia; Mardero, Sofia (March 2020). "Living Smallholder Vulnerability: The Everyday Experience of Climate Change in Calakmul, Mexico". Journal of Latin American Geography. University of Texas Press. 19 (2): 110–142. doi:10.1353/lag.2020.0028. S2CID 216383920. Archived from the original on 18 June 2022. Retrieved 11 March 2022.
  135. Adger, Neil; Jouni Paavola; Saleemul Huq; et al., eds. (2006). Fairness in adaptation to climate change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-01227-0.
  136. Walsh, K. J. E.; Camargo, S. J.; Knutson, T. R.; Kossin, J.; Lee, T. -C.; Murakami, H.; Patricola, C. (1 December 2019). "Tropical cyclones and climate change". Tropical Cyclone Research and Review. 8 (4): 240–250. Bibcode:2019TCRR....8..240W. doi:10.1016/j.tcrr.2020.01.004. ISSN 2225-6032.
  137. Christian-Smith, Juliet; Peter H. Gleick; Heather Cooley; et al. (2012). A twenty-first century US water policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199859443.
  138. Giroux, Henry A. (2006). "Reading Hurricane Katrina: Race, Class, and the Biopolitics of Disposability". College Literature. 33 (3): 171–196. doi:10.1353/lit.2006.0037. S2CID 144188079.
  139. Elliott, James R.; Pais, Jeremy (2006). "Race, class, and Hurricane Katrina: Social differences in human responses to disaster". Social Science Research. 35 (2): 295–321. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2006.02.003.
  140. Masozera, Michel (2007). "Distribution of impacts of natural disasters across income groups: A case study of New Orleans". Ecological Economics. 63 (2–3): 299–306. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.06.013.
  141. Mohai, Paul; Pellow, David; Roberts, J. Timmons (2009). "Environmental Justice". Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 34 (1): 405–430. doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-082508-094348.

Further reading
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Climate justice.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.