This project engages with justice in climate politics through a case study of the REDD+-mechanism. The project is aiming towards offering a more nuanced understanding of different perceptions of justice and how these inflict upon the outcome and judgements of climate policies exemplified by REDD+.
The theoretical framework for the analysis is based upon three distinct theories of justice, respectively Utilitarianism, John Rawls’ social justice and Robert Nozick’s libertarianism. Based on this framework, the analysis of REDD+-projects contains the statements and views expressed by the actors involved in the programme and seeks to classify arguments for and against REDD+ as a just solution within the theoretical framework. Afterwards a discussion of improvement of climate solutions towards becoming more just for everyone follows. This discussion portrays underlying discourses and power relations in the current climate politics regime and offers an alternative discourse based on the findings in the analysis.
It is concluded that the current power structures within climate politics favour a western epistemology and how certain people defy the legitimacy of the REDD+ due to this. The alternative discourse should entail a wider perspective and include aspects such as the historical responsibility for the climate changes, respect for different epistemologies and social consequences of climate initiatives for people in the Global South.
|Uddannelser||Basis - Samfundsvidenskabelig Bacheloruddannelse, (Bachelor uddannelse) Bachelor|
|Udgivelsesdato||27 maj 2017|
- Climate Justice