ClimATe justice: The science And The evidence Key points july 2014

Transcription

1 Climate justice: the science and the evidence What is the science behind the idea of climate justice? Is it just a campaign slogan? The second of three dialogues sought to summarise and clarify the growing evidence base for climate justice and explore its implications. The event, held in June 2014, was hosted by Glasgow Caledonian University and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation with the participation of the Mary Robinson Foundation Climate Justice. Key points The science behind climate justice is still being defined and articulated. This process involves gathering and sifting academic evidence across many scientific disciplines. Discourse on climate justice is supported by three key pillars: climate change, human rights and global development. All three are required for an informed analysis of the evidence. Climate justice can be seen in terms of an examination of risks, rights and responsibilities. What risks are faced and by whom? What rights to development and human fulfilment do individuals and communities have? And what responsibilities should institutions, businesses and individuals exercise? A key part of that conversation about rights and responsibilities is the position of future generations. Climate justice implies that future generations have rights that must be upheld by the generations that precede them. As yet there is no clear means to achieve this through law or policy. Messages need to be tailored so they are accessible to different audiences, to ensure that the evidence on climate justice feeds into policy and assists the communities most affected by climate change. JULY 2014

2 Creating an evidence base The concept of climate justice is relatively new in academic and policy circles. Its origins lie with non-governmental organisations and environmental campaigners, who have highlighted the disproportionately damaging effects of climate change on the poorest nations of the world and the poorest groups in all societies. Conceptualising climate justice as more than a campaign slogan requires an understanding of the physical science of climate change, the economics of development, the legal and ethical foundations of human rights and social justice, and the effects of social policy. Climate justice is thus trans-disciplinary but an emerging discipline in its own right. The work of the Mary Robinson Foundation The Mary Robinson Foundation Climate Justice was one of the first organisations to seek to describe and explain this emerging science. Its baseline study found that the term was mainly used by civil society organisations, infrequently by nations, not at all by private sector bodies, and was regarded as taboo within UN climate change negotiations. The Foundation describes climate justice research as the study at the interface of human rights, climate change and development, underpinned by a set of ethical principles, the Principles of Climate Justice. This includes: research focusing on the impacts of climate change on individuals and society, considering climate change in the context of development and human rights; research focusing on helping the most vulnerable people and groups to adapt to the impacts of climate change; research on low-carbon technologies and development focused on providing opportunities for people living in low-income countries and countries with low carbon emissions. Sean McCabe, policy assistant at the Foundation, cited a growing body of literature focused on climate justice as evidence that the concept is gaining traction. This includes a climate justicefocused issue of the Journal of Human Rights and the Environment and a special edition of the Health and Human Rights Journal, as well as a forthcoming report on climate change justice and human rights by the International Bar Association. Together, he argued, such research could help provide robust evidence for just climate action at international forums and negotiations. The work of the Centre for Climate Justice Glasgow Caledonian University s Centre for Climate Justice has built on the Mary Robinson Foundation s work with a comprehensive analysis of academic evidence spanning ten years of literature within four global databases. More than 8,500 articles were identified, of which 1,100 were deemed sufficiently relevant to be included in Glasgow Caledonian University s climate justice resource hub. While the hub does not provide open access to the academic literature, it offers a succinct summary of each paper selected, and explains its relevance to three key pillars : the human, societal and developmental aspects of climate change; adaptation to the impacts of climate change; and equitable low-carbon development. The summary of each paper also sets out where there are gaps in knowledge and what further research is needed, and who or what might challenge or change existing approaches.

3 The hub brings together for the first time all the existing research on climate justice and is open to anyone with an interest in it, not just the academic community. Tahseen Jafry, director of the centre, stressed that this is work in progress and is being constantly updated. But she said it could act as a basis for continuing dialogue on climate justice issues, prompting cuttingedge research and fostering new collaborations between institutions. Key messages from the evidence The evidence collected by the Centre for Climate Justice covers 16 themes, of which six have been fully examined. From each of these, five key messages have been distilled. The low-carbon technology theme covers 76 peer-reviewed papers published between 2002 and One of the key findings is that sustainable development strategies and climate change mitigation policies can be mutually reinforcing. The social justice theme, based on an analysis of 22 papers, highlights the uneven distribution of climate change impacts. A key message is the importance of equity and fairness in building resilience. The legal perspectives theme, covering 15 papers, reveals the disconnect between current systems of law and governance and the challenges of climate change. It explores the legal position of people affected by climate change and whether there should be laws establishing the rights of environmental refugees. The theme of procedural justice covers six peer-reviewed papers. Among the findings are that gender issues have been sidelined, restricting women s influence over climate change negotiations, and that scientific research emerging from developing countries is underrepresented. The human rights theme covers 25 papers published between 2006 and Its findings include the failure of judicial authorities to recognise environmental rights as human rights, and the importance of preserving a right to development. The last of the six themes explores the climate justice movement, examining eight academic papers. It examines some of the challenges facing climate justice activists and explains how climate justice addresses the triple inequality of unequal vulnerability, unequal responsibility, and unequal mitigation and adaptation costs. The Centre for Sustainable Energy s evidence review A separate review on climate change and social justice has been undertaken by the Centre for Sustainable Energy and the universities of Oxford and Manchester, supported by JRF, focusing on the emerging evidence base in the UK. Based on a review of around 70 research papers, it examines the interface between climate change and social justice studies. It looks particularly at research where climate change has been examined from a social justice perspective, as these areas are not often brought together. The review looks at the vulnerability of different social groups to climate change; for example, it notes strong links between old age and risk from heatwaves, and between low income, poorquality housing and the risk of coastal flooding. The review found that plans to adapt to the impacts of climate change seldom address issues of social justice and that there is little evidence yet of environmental risks being linked with

4 assessments of social vulnerability to inform responses in the UK. Similarly, it found limited evidence of any attempt to build fairness into policies designed to reduce carbon emissions. The Climate Crunch study The Climate Crunch study, funded by the Economic and Social Research Council, brings together the findings of six four-year climate change leadership fellowships. Using the analogy of the credit crunch, it examines whether global environmental management, like global financial management, could reach a stage where it simply ceases to work. The research is framed in terms of the interaction of risks, rights and responsibilities. It poses questions such as: What political risks arise from the way rights and responsibilities are distributed? Who has the right to a high-carbon lifestyle? Does the responsibility for reducing carbon emissions lie with producers or consumers? When such questions were discussed in international workshops as part of the research study, policy experts were most interested in risks and had relatively little to say about rights, raising questions about how far a rights-based approach is currently informing policy thinking. Applying the evidence There was widespread acknowledgement at the Glasgow event that climate justice has yet to gain real traction with key audiences, from politicians negotiating on climate change emissions to businesses considering the future sustainability of their activity. Participants recognised that there were multiple audiences for the idea of climate justice and a host of contexts in which it could be applied. Chris Shaw, research assistant at the University of Oxford s Environmental Change Institute, described a governance trap where governments directed responsibility for action on carbon emissions to individuals and businesses, while people and organisations expect political leadership to set the rules for action. The result is an unwillingness to take radical or long-term action. The timing and framing of messages is key to getting anybody to act, he said. The question of timing and framing was picked up in a variety of ways in discussion groups at the event. While the importance of academic research was recognised, participants also highlighted its drawbacks. Peer-reviewed papers are often out of date by the time they are published, while policy-makers and government ministers tend to be interested in simple key messages rather than detailed evidence. In this context the grey literature of policy reports and discussion papers can be as vital in shaping debate as the literature published in academic journals. Professional bodies and think tanks can often produce research at a faster pace and feed more directly into the policymaking process. Triggers for action Discussion also focused on what circumstances might shift institutions and communities towards more environmentally just responses to climate change. Some felt little would change until politicians were faced with catastrophic circumstances: the floods in the south of England in early 2014 were cited as one example. The question of climate refugees prompted particular debate. While participants recognised governments responsibilities towards those displaced by climate change, there were concerns

5 both about the difficulties in establishing cause-and-effect relationships between a changing climate and population movements, and about negative responses to migration from politicians and local communities. The discussion groups emphasised the importance of building trust in order to respond appropriately to the impacts of climate change. Participants stressed that climate change mitigation could fail unless policies and initiatives engage with low-income groups. Less information and more action was the plea of one discussion group, highlighting that climate justice is an applied science. As Tahseen Jafry, director of the Centre for Climate Justice, commented, people must be at the heart of the discourse. An intergenerational responsibility Climate justice is not only a question of ensuring that nobody is unfairly impacted by climate change now: it also requires recognition that future generations have rights too. This is a concept that remains unacknowledged in prevailing legal systems and demands a comprehensive rethinking of the balance between risks, rights and responsibilities. Mandy Meikle, a researcher with the Centre for Climate Justice, pointed out that assessing the detrimental effects of climate change on vulnerable groups involves making projections about the future. For this reason, such effects are not considered violations of human rights within current legal systems: the people whose rights are infringed might not yet have been born. This prompted one participant to suggest there should be an ombudsman for future generations to act as an advocate for those most at risk from environmental crisis. Taking stock and moving on A final event in the series of dialogues will be held in London on 9 October 2014, drawing together current thinking on climate justice and identifying actions needed to address the key challenges for the future.

6 Find out more about JRF s work on climate change at ref 3029