This paper outlines the main differences between ecocentric and anthropocentric positions in regard to justice, exploring university students’ perceptions of the concepts of social and ecological justice and reflecting on how values assigned to humans and the environment are balanced and contested. Putting justice for people before the environment is based on evidence that biological conservation can disadvantage local communities; the idea that the very notion of justice is framed by humans and therefore remains a human issue; and the assumption that humans have a higher value than other species. Putting justice for the environment first assumes that only an ecocentric ethic guarantees protection of all species, including humans, and therefore ecological justice already guarantees social justice. This research shows that many students emphasize the convergence of social and ecological justice where human and environmental interests correspond. While not wishing to diminish the underlying assumptions of either ethical orientation, the common “enemy” of both vulnerable communities and nonhuman nature, as identified by students, is an ideology of economic growth and industrial development. http://dx.doi.org/10.13135/2384-8677/2688 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
This critical, literature-review based research project, inspired by the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine war, examines the limitations and possibilities of restorative justice in a time of war. Any armed conflict creates and amplifies the need for extreme militarisation and securitisation, accompanied by belligerent rhetoric. Thus, for restorative justice scholars and practitioners, the outbreak of war challenges the applicability of restorative justice values and practices, as bipolar interpretations of events, conflicts, and human suffering displace more balanced views. The purpose of our research is to critically discuss the applicability of restorative justice in times of war and in the context of the Russo-Ukrainian War in particular. Our motivation to focus on this specific war and to examine the (im)possibilities of restorative justice from Eurocentric perspective stems from three observations: (1) In the last 20 years restorative justice was continuously promoted in Europe as a new “culture” of justice; (2) The Russo-Ukrainian War currently takes place on the European continent and impacts the European security architecture more than that of other world regions; (3) This war has a particular meaning to the world (e.g., a violent clash between the (former) Cold War superpowers, an element of surprise, the shattered myth of overwhelming Russian military might, the nuclear threat coupled with a global energy crisis etc.).
DOCUMENT
The transition towards sustainable and just food systems is ongoing, illustrated by an increasing number of initiatives that try to address unsustainable practices and social injustices. Insights are needed into what a just transition entails in order to critically engage with plural and potentially conflicting justice conceptualisations. Researchers play an active role in food system transitions, but it is unclear which conceptualisations and principles of justice they enact when writing about food system initiatives. To fill this gap this paper investigates: Which conceptualisations of justice emerge from the literature related to food system initiatives and which principles of justice do authors use? We developed an initial framework for which we drew on political philosophy literature. We then undertook an extensive review of the food system transitions literature using this framework and were able to identify a range of recognition, distributive, and procedural justice conceptualisations and associated principles of justice. Recognised as subjects of justice were those with a particular role in the food system, people who are marginalised, Indigenous communities, those with experiences of negative consequences of the food system, future generations, and nonhumans. The identified conceptualisations and the developed framework can be used by those involved in food system initiatives to reflect on how they conceptualise justice. We challenge them to be more explicit about who they do and do not recognise as subjects of justice and which principles of justice they use. Such clarity is needed to reflexively enact a just transition towards sustainable and just food systems.
LINK
Dit project onderzoekt ontwikkelperspectieven voor de krimpende stad door het realiseren van de Degrowth Daily, een themakrant over Degrowth en de krimpende stad. Tot nu toe wordt de ‘krimpende stad’ vooral als probleem neergezet en is er weinig aandacht voor alternatieve ontwikkelingsperspectieven. Twee vragen staan centraal in dit project: in hoeverre biedt Degrowth een ontwikkelperspectief voor de krimpende stad? En in hoeverre is de krimpende stad geschikt als proeftuin voor praktijken van Degrowth? Het startpunt van het project vormt de notie dat zowel Degrowth als de krimpende stad groei als het dominante ontwikkelingsparadigma in onze samenleving bevragen. De één doet dit vanuit economisch en ecologisch perspectief, de ander vanuit stedenbouwkundigperspectief. Het concept Degrowth raakt de laatste jaren steeds meer in zwang, getuige een toenemende stroom aan academische publicaties, conferenties en andersoortige initiatieven. Er is echter nog weinig over Degrowth vanuit stedenbouwkundig perspectief geschreven. Dit project bouwt voort op het concept ‘kleiner groeien’ (Hermans, 2016) en onderzoekt in hoeverre dit concept mogelijkheden biedt te werken aan een perspectief van “environmental sustainability, social justice and well-being”. De twee onderzoeksvragen worden geadresseerd middels een gerichte literatuurstudie De vondsten hieruit worden getoetst doormiddel van actieonderzoek in de “krimpregio” Parkstad-Limburg. Aan de hand van een focusgroep, interviews en een stakeholder engagement workshop brengt dit onderzoek diverse stakeholder perspectieven samen. Deze perspectieven worden aan de hand van diverse vertelvormen gepresenteerd in de themakrant Degrowth Daily. Deze krant beoogt het maatschappelijke en wetenschappelijke debat over perspectieven voor ‘de krimpende stad’ te verbreden.
The goal of this research is to develop an instrument for working with justice in urban development projects for urban professionals such as policy makers, urban planners and designers. The instrument will provide them with the tools to set up participatory processes for the development of urban areas where conflicting interests and perspective on justice form a challenge in working towards a just solution for a shared ambition. The plans for the future of de Wallen, Amsterdam’s Red Light District, will function as a case study for this research. There, conflicting interests have formed a challenge in creating a shared vision for the future of the neighborhood, mainly regarding the presence of sex work. The instrument will be developed in co-creation with the stakeholders of the neighborhood, with a focus on the involved policy makers and designers as the changemakers.
KLM published a climate plan (2023), which describes how the airline wants to reach its science-base targets for carbon intensity as developed by SBTi. The research question is "how does the KLM climate plan realistically relate to the emission reduction targets of a general 1.5°C climate scenario, Dutch policy, principles of climate justice, and legal climate obligations?" It is important that airline climate plans lead to a societal just reduction of emissions. The research is a first to apply principles of 'climate justice' to an airline. It will provide insights and facts for the societal and political discussions about sustainable aviation development.
