Globalization and Biodiversity: Issues in Environmental Justice (original) (raw)
Related papers
International Biodiversity Law and Social Justice in Developing Countries
Law and Justice Review, 2021
This paper discusses the fairness of applying the "Common but Differentiated Responsibilities" principle that is adapted in International Biodiversity Law to the "Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity" through the lens of social justice expounded by Rawls and other respective scholars. After defining the concepts that are used through the paper and subsequently analyzing the international law and related literature on the differentiated approach to conservation and sustainable use, it is argued that the global approach that distinguishes the responsibilities of the states with regard to their economic level is less likely to meet the demands of social justice both for current and future generations of developing countries. The holistic approach, which is adopted for the evaluation of this argument in favor of an egalitarian approach to conservation and sustainable use, indicates the close linkages between the conservation of biodiversity and environmental justice issues, economic concerns in the long term, socioeconomic inequalities, and traditional communities-especially in biological resourcerich developing countries. Certain cases are introduced in order to solidify that the prioritization of socioeconomic development over biodiversity conservation in developing economies is not effective in addressing the demands of the least advantaged communities of current and future generations-and therefore less likely to comply with the demands of social justice.
2005
Global environmental justice and biodiversity conservation.
The Geographical Journal 179(2): 122-131 , 2013
This paper explores the potential for an environmental justice framing to shed new light on conservation controversies. We argue that, in order to make such progress, environmental justice analysis will need to provide a ‘difference-friendly’ conception of justice and that this will necessarily involve moving beyond dominant liberal conceptions of distributional fairness. We are largely welcoming of global deployments of distributive justice principles. However, we also explore the dangers of focusing on distribution alone, questioning the assumption of positive relationships between benefit sharing and more culturally defined dimensions of justice such as recognition. The limits of access and benefit sharing for delivering justice writ large is that it can disenfranchise people who are less well equipped or less willing to navigate its prevailing system of knowledge. We argue that, especially in the context of resource poverty, efforts to improve distribution can require potential beneficiaries to assimilate to dominant discourses of society and nature. Such conditionality can contract the opportunities for local and autonomous constructions of ‘different’ ways of knowing nature, and in doing so may also contract possibilities for flourishing biodiversities.
Reconciling Ecological and Social Justice to Promote Biodiversity Conservation
Biological Conservation, 2015
In this article we focus upon a division between generalized schools of philosophical and ethical thought about culture and conservation. There is an ongoing debate playing out over conservation between those who believe conservation threatens community livelihoods and traditional practices, and those who believe conservation is essential to protect nonhuman species from the impact of human development and population growth. We argue for reconciliation between these schools of thought and a cooperative push toward the cultivation of an environmentally-focused perspective that embraces not only social and economic justice but also concern for non-human species. Our goal is to underline the ethics and tangible benefits that may result from combining the cultural data and knowledge of the social sciences with understanding of environmental science and conservation. We highlight instances in which social scientists overlook their own anthropocentric bias in relationship to ecological justice, or justice for all species, in favor of exclusive social justice among people. We focus on the polemical stances of this debate in order to emphasize the importance of a middle road of cooperation that acknowledges the rights of human and nonhuman species, alike. In conclusion, we present an alternative set of ethics and research activities for social scientists concerned with conservation and offer ideas on how to reconcile the conflicting interests of people and the environment.
The dynamics of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) process are determined less by policies geared towards the effective conservation of biodiversity than the interests in its commercialisation. This must be addressed in the development of a democratic politics of biodiversity. This policy paper places the CBD in the context of globalisation (Part 2), after which it discusses the central functions that have emerged over the last fourteen years since its ratification (Part 3). The CBD process continues to be shaped by conflicts, uncertainties and open questions. This was apparent at the last member state conference in Curitiba, Brazil. Central lines of conflict include questions of access, benefit sharing and intellectual property rights, problematic conservation strategies and the introduction of genetically modified seed, the disputed position of indigenous peoples and farming communities in negotiations, and the slow implementation process. Further to these, this paper considers the relationship of the CBD process to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the structural imbalances of power that exist (Part 4). The CBD obscures important questions, especially those of technological development, the increasing militarisation of the appropriation of nature and biopiracy, as well as the unequal role and options for action available to men and women (Part 5). In light of its current relevance, this paper considers the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and highlights the opportunities and risks it presents (Part 6). In conclusion, the main orientations of a democratic politics of biodiversity (Part 7) and the role of civil society actors (Part 8) are addressed, with a view to the Ninth Member State Conference which will take place in Germany in May 2008. This paper does not make recommendations for concrete demands, as such demands will not only emerge from the analysis here, but have also been elaborated already by the individual actors involved. This paper attempts to place the many conflictual questions in their context and elaborate some of their causes, in order to facilitate discussion and negotiation.