Climate justice is a term used for framing global warming as an ethical and political issue, rather than one that is purely environmental or physical in nature. This is done by relating the effects of climate change to concepts of justice, particularly environmental justice and social justice and by examining issues such as equality, human rights, collective rights, and the historical responsibilities for climate change.
A fundamental proposition of climate justice is that those who are
least responsible for climate change suffer its gravest consequences.
The term climate justice is also used to mean actual legal action on climate change issues. In 2017, a report of the United Nations Environment Program identified 894 ongoing legal actions worldwide.
Reasons for the differential effects of climate change
The ability of populations to mitigate and adapt to the negative
consequences of climate change are shaped by factors such as income,
race, class, gender, capital and political representation.
As low-income communities and communities of color possess few if any
adaptive resources, they are particularly vulnerable to climate change.
People living in poverty or in precarious circumstances tend to have
neither the resources nor the insurance coverage necessary to recover
from environmental disasters. On top of that, such populations often receive an unequal share of disaster relief and recovery assistance.
History of the term's use
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.
Subsequently, in August–September 2002, international environmental groups met in Johannesburg for the Earth Summit. 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 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
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.
At the 2007 Bali Conference, 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.
In 2009, the Climate Justice Action Network was formed during the run-up to the Copenhagen Summit. It proposed civil disobedience and direct action during the summit, and many climate activists used the slogan 'system change not climate change'.
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.
In December 2018, the People’s Demands for Climate Justice,
signed by 292,000 individuals and 366 organisations, called upon
government delegates at COP24 comply with a list of six climate justice demands
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 22, Cochabamba, Bolivia
Controversial interpretations
One contentious issue in debates about climate justice is the extent to which capitalism
is viewed as its root cause. This question frequently leads to
fundamental disagreements 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, the
latter view capitalism with its exploitative traits as the underlying
central issue.
Hurricane Katrina case study
According to one study, Hurricane Katrina provided insights into how climate change disasters affect different people differently, as it had a disproportionate effect on low-income and minority groups.
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. Low-income and black communities had little resources and limited mobility to evacuate before the storm. Also, after the hurricane, low-income communities were most affected by contamination, and this was made worse by the fact that government relief measures failed to adequately assist those most at risk.
Legal actions on climate change issues
In 2018, ten families from European countries, Kenya and Fiji filed a suit against the European Union for the threats against their homes caused by the EU greenhouse emissions.
Against states
Netherlands
In 2012, the Dutch lawyer Roger Cox gave the idea of judicial intervention to force action against climate change. In 2013, the Urgenda Foundation, with 900 co-plaintiffs, has filed a lawsuit against the Government of the Netherlands "for not taking sufficient measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that cause dangerous climate change".
In 2015, the District Court of The Hague ruled that the government of the Netherlands must do more to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to protect its citizens from climate change (Urgenda climate case). It was described as a "precedent-setting judgment" and as the "world’s first climate liability suit".
According to James Thornton, chief executive of Client Earth,
"Most remarkably, it is based in essence on established science and the
ancient principle of a government's duty of care. That reasoning is
applicable in any legal system and will certainly be used by courts in
other countries".
Others
After the landmark ruling of the Netherlands in 2015, groups in other countries tried the same judicial approach. For instance, groups went to court in order to protect people from climate change in Belgium, India, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, Switzerland, and the United States.
Against companies
In the United States, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace together with the cities of Boulder, Arcata and Oakland won against the Export-Import Bank of the United States and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (state-owned enterprises of the United States government), which were accused of financing fossil-fuel projects detrimental to a stable climate, in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act (case filed in 2002 and settled in 2009).
In 2016, a government body of the Philippines
(the Commission on Human Rights) launched an official investigation
concerning climate change against 47 of the world's largest carbon
producers.
In 2017, San Francisco, Oakland and other California coastal communities sued multiple fossil-fuel companies for rising sea levels. In 2018, the city of New York announced that it is taking five fossil fuel firms (BP, ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and Shell) to federal court due to their contribution to climate change (from which the city is already suffering).