Exploring Freedom in a Global Ecology Sen's Capability Approach as a solution for Environmental Deterioration (original) (raw)
Related papers
Ecological Rights to Future Generations: A Capability Approach
Human Rights and Sustainability Moral responsibilities for the future, 2017
This chapter explores the possibility of extending Sen’s and Nussbaum’s capability approach to the question of ecological obligations to future generations. It is argued that we can extend capability protection to future generations, but this leaves open which resources such a theory is to leave to future generations. The chapter argues that the influential views of Rawls and Solow, that these resources should be conceived in terms of ‘total capital’, cannot be accepted by a capability approach, because of their assumption of substitutability between natural and human-made capital. It is proposed that a CTJ best fits with a combination of two ecological approaches: the ecological space approach and Herman Daly’s resource rules.
Ecological Surety and Capabilities: Normative Issues
Does Sen's Capability Approach deal adequately with ecosystems and the services they provide? In this paper, we shall attempt to discuss some aspects of this question by examining human development from an ecosystems perspective, i.e. with an emphasis on how people's quality of life is determined by ecosystem services. In particular, we shall examine Sen's capability approach, interpreting it as an approach that recognizes the crucial role that ecosystems play in enabling people to pursue the kinds of life that they have reason to value,
A rights foundation for ecological democracy
Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 2019
What would it mean to conceptualize some environmental relationships as bundles of rights, rather than as a good as generally defined by liberalism? Environmental rights are a category of human rights necessarily central to both democracy and global environmental protection and governance (ecological democracy). The world of democratic politics and governance since mid-twentieth century has been transformed by a rights revolution in which recognized rights have come to constitute a 'global normative order.' There are several policy spaces in which persuasive environmental rights discourses have been emerging from existing or foreseeable congruences of elite and popular environmental norms, including (1) rights involving access to information and decision-making processes; (2) rights ensuring access to food and water; and (3) rights providing environmental security to all. We analyze these three rights discourses and assess their current and necessary future trajectories. We identify next steps in achieving better understanding and more meaningful establishment of environmental rights and their integration into our thinking about human rights, with attention to how they can be reconciled with the social and cultural diversity of democratic environmental governance in coming turbulent times.
Acknowledging environmental degradation as a profoundly political phenomenon, this article examines how uninvited environmental change transforms people's understandings of and relationships to the natural world. Drawing on qualitative research conducted in a semi-remote Canadian Anishinaabe community and among Euro-American residents of Ohio who oppose local shale energy development, I trace parallels between the disempowerment and vulnerability experienced by people with very different assumptions about the world and their place in it and very different positions within the global political economic system. While environmental justice scholars have revealed compelling correlations between social and environmental inequity, I argue that investigating environmental degradation's sociocultural impacts among relatively privileged groups can encourage more dynamic explorations of conjoined environmental/social/political systems and expose ongoing structural shifts. My comparative analysis seems to suggest that ever-increasing segments of the world's population now contend with environmental challenges that they did not authorize, and do not benefit from. I thus conclude by calling for additional investigations of environmental degradation in unexpected places and the implications of extensive inequity for global sustainability. Cet article examine comment les changements environnementaux sans y être invité transforme les compréhensions des gens du monde naturel. Leur relation avec la nature est également modifiée. Je reconnais la dégradation de l'environnement comme un phénomène profondément politique. Je trace un parallèle entre l'impuissance et la vulnérabilité vécue par les personnes qui détiennent des hypothèses très différentes sur le monde et de leur place dans ce monde, et qui détiennent des positions socio-économiques différentes au sein du système économique et politique mondial. J'utilise une recherche qualitative menée dans une communauté Anishinaabe canadienne, et parmi les résidents américains de l'Ohio qui s'opposent au développement de l'énergie des gaz de schiste local. Alors que les chercheurs de justice environnementale ont révélé des corrélations convaincantes entre les inégalités sociales et de l'environnement, je soutiens que l'enquête des impacts socioculturels de la dégradation de l'environnement entre les groupes relativement privilégiés peut encourager les explorations plus dynamiques des systèmes conjoints environnementaux/sociaux/politiques, et d'exposer les changements structurels en cours. Mon analyse comparative suggère qu'un nombre croissant de gens soutiennent maintenant avec les défis environnementaux qu'ils n'autorisaient pas, et qu'ils ne bénéficient pas. Je conclus en demandant des investigations complémentaires de la dégradation de l'environnement dans des endroits inattendus, et les implications de ce grande injustice pour la durabilité mondiale. Reconociendo la degradación medioambiental como un fenómeno profundamente político, este artículo examina como los cambios medioambientales no deseados transforman el entendimiento de las personas sobre el mundo natural y su relación con este. Basándose en una investigación cualitativa realizada en la semi remota comunidad Anishinaabe Canadiense y entre residentes americanos de Ohio, los cuales se oponen al desarrollo local energético de gas de esquisto; trazo paralelismos entre la pérdida de poder y la vulnerabilidad que sufren las personas que tienen muy diferentes nociones sobre el mundo y su lugar en él, y con muy distintas posiciones dentro del sistema político económico global. Si bien los expertos en justicia ambiental han revelado correlaciones convincentes entre inequidad social y ambiental, yo argumento que investigando el impacto sociocultural de la degradación del medio ambiente entre grupos relativamente privilegiados es posible incentivar exploraciones más dinámicas sobre sistemas conjuntos de tipo medioambiental / sociales / políticos, y revelar los cambios estructurales en curso. Mi análisis comparativo parece sugerir que cada vez más, distintos segmentos de la población mundial lidian con desafíos ambientales los cuales no han sido autorizados por ellos, y de los cuales no se benefician. De esta manera concluyo pidiendo por investigaciones adicionales sobre la degradación medioambiental en lugares inesperados, al igual que las consecuencias de la extensa inequidad para la sustentabilidad global.
The last sixty years have seen a significant shift away from seeing resource wealth as a key component of positive macro-economic reform, to acceptance of the negative impacts that an abundance of, or dependence on, natural resources can have on security, economic growth, and the development of accountable political institutions. The appropriation and extraction of natural resources emerge as expressions of complex relations existing within and between states, institutions and actors. At the same time, the attention given to this potential 'resource curse' has precipitated a number of critiques that challenge not only the data and statistical methods used to link resource wealth with negative development outcomes, but also the theoretical foundation and relevance of studies that reduce complex socio-political and economic relations to the presence of specific resources. This article draws on key literature from the field of political ecology to demonstrate how the concept of 'nature' has been omitted from these discussions. Critical analysis of 'nature' can refine the theoretical foundation and practical application of the 'resource curse' thesis. By re-inserting, re-politicizing and re-localizing the concept of nature we can include local production and consumption in the analysis, while also highlighting the link between our understanding of natural resources and historically rooted discourses of 'proper-use.' Les soixante dernières années ont vu un changement significatif loin de l'identification d'une abondance de ressources naturelles comme un élément clé de la réforme macro-économique positif. Maintenant, on accepte les impacts négatifs que l'abondance de (ou la dépendance) des ressources naturelles peut avoir sur la sécurité, la croissance économique et le développement des institutions politiques responsables. L'appropriation et l'extraction des ressources naturelles sont considérées comme des expressions de relations complexes qui existent au sein et entre les Etats, les institutions et les acteurs. Dans le même temps, l'attention portée à ce potentiel «malédiction des ressources» a précipité un certain nombre de critiques qui remettent en question les données et les méthodes statistiques utilisées pour lier la richesse des ressources avec les résultats de développement négatives, et aussi le fondement théorique et la pertinence des études qui permettent de réduire complexe relations socio-politiques et économiques à la présence de ressources spécifiques. Cet article s'appuie sur la littérature clé de l'écologie politique pour démontrer comment le concept de «nature» a été omis dans ces discussions. Une analyse critique de la «nature» peut affiner les fondements théoriques et les applications pratiques de la thèse de la «malédiction des ressources». En réinsérant, re-politiser et re-localiser le concept de nature, nous pouvons inclure la production locale et la consommation dans l'analyse, tout en soulignant le lien entre notre connaissance des ressources naturelles et des discours historiquement enracinées de «bon usage». Los últimos sesenta años han presenciado un cambio significativo, al cambiarse la percepción de la riqueza de recursos de un componente clave de la reforma macroeconómica a aceptarse el impacto negativo que la abundancia de recursos naturales, o una dependencia de los mismos, puede tener sobre la seguridad, el crecimiento económico y el desarrollo de instituciones políticas que deban responder de sus acciones. La apropiación y extracción de recursos naturales emerge como la expresión de relaciones complejas entre partes de una nación, estados, instituciones y otros actores. Al mismo tiempo, la atención prestada a esta potencial "maldición del recurso" ha dado lugar a numerosas críticas que ponen en duda no solo los datos y métodos estadísticos usados para relacionas riqueza de recursos con resultados negativos en el desarrollo, sino también los fundamentos teóricos y la relevancia de los estudios que reducen a la presencia de recursos específicos complejas relaciones socio-políticas y económicas. Este artículo toma como base literatura básica en el campo de la ecología política para demostrar cómo se ha omitido el concepto de "naturaleza" de estas discusiones. El análisis crítico de "naturaleza" puede refinar la fundamentación teórica y la aplicación práctica de la tesis de la "maldición del recurso". Mediante la reinserción, repolitización y relocalización del concepto de naturaleza es posible incluir la producción y el consumo local en el análisis, al mismo tiempo que enfatizar el enlace entre nuestro entendimiento de los recursos naturales y discursos de raíz histórica del "uso propio".
Rights of Nature: Institutions, Law, and Policy for Sustainable Development
The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Environmental Politics, 2021
With the onset of climate change, the prospect of mass extinction, and the closing win dow of opportunity to take meaningful action, a growing number of activists, lawyers, sci entists, policy-makers, and everyday people are calling for Rights of Nature (RoN) to be legally recognized as a way to transform human legal and governance systems to priori tize ecological sustainability. Over the past decade, RoN has gone from being a radical idea espoused only by a handful of marginalized actors to a legal strategy seriously con sidered in a wide variety of domestic and international policy arenas. In January 2021, at least 185 legal provisions recognizing RoN existed in 17 countries spanning five conti nents, and 50 more RoN laws were pending in a dozen other countries. RoN is also recog nized in numerous international policy documents. After defining RoN, this chapter exam ines how different kinds of actors have organized in global networks to advance RoN in different policy arenas through distinct pathways. This has caused RoN to be structured and implemented differently in distinct contexts. The chapter examines this variation, comparing cases from around the world. It highlights the implications of structuring RoN as a set of unique substantive rights for ecosystems versus extending legal personhood (a set of rights designed for humans). It concludes by examining the relationship between RoN and human rights-including environmental rights, Indigenous rights, and economic rights-and the implications for reconceptualizing sustainable development to prioritize ecological sustainability.