4.4 Article

Is there a global environmental justice movement?

期刊

JOURNAL OF PEASANT STUDIES
卷 43, 期 3, 页码 731-755

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/03066150.2016.1141198

关键词

environmental justice; ecological distribution conflicts; collaborative research; activist knowledge; EJatlas; environmental racism; environmentalism of the poor; climate justice; statistical political ecology

资金

  1. EJOLT Project, Environmental Justice Organisations, Liabilities and Trade, an FP7 project - European Commission [266642]
  2. Transformations to Sustainability Programme from the International Social Science Council (ISSC) [T2S_PP_289, TKN150317115354]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

One of the causes of the increasing number of ecological distribution conflicts around the world is the changing metabolism of the economy in terms of growing flows of energy and materials. There are conflicts on resource extraction, transport and waste disposal. Therefore, there are many local complaints, as shown in the Atlas of Environmental Justice (EJatlas) and other inventories. And not only complaints; there are also many successful examples of stopping projects and developing alternatives, testifying to the existence of a rural and urban global movement for environmental justice. Moreover, since the 1980s and 1990s, this movement has developed a set of concepts and campaign slogans to describe and intervene in such conflicts. They include environmental racism, popular epidemiology, the environmentalism of the poor and the indigenous, biopiracy, tree plantations are not forests, the ecological debt, climate justice, food sovereignty, land grabbing and water justice, among other concepts. These terms were born from socio-environmental activism, but sometimes they have also been taken up by academic political ecologists and ecological economists who, for their part, have contributed other concepts to the global environmental justice movement, such as 'ecologically unequal exchange' or the 'ecological footprint'.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据