Climate justice

Climate justice is an approach to climate action that focuses on the unequal impacts of climate change on marginalized or otherwise vulnerable populations.^[1] Climate justice wants to achieve an equitable distribution of both the burdens of climate change and the efforts to mitigate climate change.^[2] Climate justice is a type of environmental justice.^[3]

Fridays for Future demonstration in Berlin in September 2021 with the slogan "fight for climate justice".

Climate justice examines concepts such as equality, human rights, collective rights, and the historical responsibilities for climate change. This is done by relating the causes and effects of climate change to concepts of justice, particularly environmental justice and social justice. Historically marginalized communities often face the worst consequences of climate change. Depending on the country and context, this may include people with low-incomes, indigenous communities or communities of color. Generally speaking, those who are the least responsible for climate change often suffer the greatest consequences.^[4][5][6] They might also be further disadvantaged by responses to climate change which might exacerbate existing inequalities. This situation is known as the 'triple injustices' of climate change.^[7][8][9]

Conceptions of climate justice can be grouped along the lines of procedural justice and distributive justice. The former stresses fair, transparent and inclusive decision making. The latter investigates a fair distribution of the costs of both climate change and the actions taken to address it.^[7] Other approaches focus on addressing social implications of climate change mitigation. If these are not addressed properly, this could result in profound economic and social tensions. It could even lead to delays in necessary changes.^[10]

Climate justice actions can include the growing global body of climate litigation.^[11] In 2017, a report of the United Nations Environment Programme identified 894 ongoing legal actions worldwide.^[12]

Definition and objectives

See also: Just transition

Use and popularity of climate justice language has increased dramatically in recent years, yet climate justice is understood in many ways, and the different meanings are sometimes contested. At its simplest, conceptions of climate justice can be grouped along the following two lines:^[7]

• procedural justice, which emphasizes fair, transparent and inclusive decision making, and
• distributive justice, which places the emphasis on who bears the costs of both climate change and the actions taken to address it.

The objectives of climate justice can be described as: "to encompasses a set of rights and obligations, which corporations, individuals and governments have towards those vulnerable people who will be in a way significantly disproportionately affected by climate change."^[13]

Climate justice examines concepts such as equality, human rights, collective rights, and the historical responsibilities for climate change. Climate justice is mainly concerned with the procedural and distributive ethical dimensions of and for climate change mitigation.

The IPCC Sixth Assessment Report underlines another principle of climate justice which is the “recognition which entails basic respect and robust engagement with and fair consideration of diverse cultures and perspectives”.^[14]  Alternatively, recognition and respect can be understood as the underlying basis for distributive and procedural justice.

Related fields are environmental justice and social justice.

Causes of injustice

Economic systems

 

Among major emitters, the U.S. has higher annual per capita emissions than China, which has more total annual emissions.^[15]

 

Cumulatively, U.S. and China emissions have caused the most greenhouse gas-related economic damage.^[16]

Whether fundamental differences in economic systems, such as capitalism versus socialism, are the, or a, root cause of climate injustice is a contentious issue. In this context, fundamental disagreements arise between liberal and conservative environmental groups on one side and leftist and radical organizations on the other. While the former often tend to blame the excesses of neoliberalism for climate change and argue in favor of market-based reform within capitalism, the latter view capitalism with its exploitative traits as the underlying central issue.^[17][18] Other possible causal explanations include hierarchies based on the group differences and the nature of the fossil fuel regime itself.^[19]

Systemic causes

 

Many participants of grassroots movements that demand climate justice also ask for system change.

It has been argued that the unwarranted rate of climate change, along with its inequality of burdens, is a structural injustice. There is political responsibility for the maintenance and support of historically constituted^[20] structural processes. This is despite assumed viable potential alternative models based on novel technologies and means. As a criterion for determining responsibility for climate change, individual causal contribution or capacity does not matter as much as responsibility for the perpetuation of carbon-intensive structures, practices, and institutions. These structures constitute the global politico-economic system, rather than enabling structural changes towards a system that does not naturally facilitate unsustainable exploitation of people and nature.^[21][22]

For others, climate justice could be pursued through existing economic frameworks, global organizations and policy mechanisms. Therefore the root-causes could be found in the causes that so far inhibited global implementation of measures like emissions trading schemes, specifically forms that deliver the assumed mitigation results.^[23]

Disproportionality between causality and burden

 

Emissions of the richest 1% are more than twice that of the poorest 50%.^[24] Compliance with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C goal would require the richest 1% to reduce emissions by at least 30 times, while per-person emissions of the poorest 50% could approximately triple.^[24]

 

Though total CO₂ emissions (size of pie charts) differ substantially among high-emitting regions, the pattern of higher income classes emitting more than lower income classes is consistent across regions.^[25] The world’s top 1% of emitters emit over 1000 times more than the bottom 1%.^[25]

 

Scaling the effect of wealth to the national level: richer (developed) countries emit more CO₂ per person than poorer (developing) countries.^[26] Emissions are roughly proportional to GDP per person, though the rate of increase diminishes with average GDP/pp of about $10,000.

The responsibility for anthropogenic climate change differs substantially among individuals and groups. Many of the people and nations most affected by climate change are among the least responsible for it.^[27][28] The most affluent citizens of the world are responsible for most environmental impacts and robust action by them is necessary for prospects of moving towards safer environmental conditions.^[29][30]

According to a 2020 report by Oxfam and the Stockholm Environment Institute,^[31][32] the richest 1% of the global population have caused twice as much carbon emissions as the poorest 50% over the 25 years from 1990 to 2015.^[33][34][24] This was, respectively, during that period, 15% of cumulative emissions compared to 7%.^[35] A second 2023 report found the richest 1% of humans produce more carbon emissions than poorest 66%, while the top 10% richest people account for more than half of global carbon emissions.^[36][37]

 

A visualisation by country of the impact of climate change (country size) and its contribution (country colour)

The bottom half of the population is directly-responsible for less than 20% of energy footprints and consume less than the top 5% in terms of trade-corrected energy. High-income individuals usually have higher energy footprints as they disproportionally use their larger financial resources for energy-intensive goods. In particular, the largest disproportionality was identified to be in the domain of transport, where the top 10% consume 56% of vehicle fuel and conduct 70% of vehicle purchases.^[38]

A 2023 review article found that if there were a 2^oC temperature rise by 2100, roughly 1 billion primarily poor people would die as a result of primarily wealthy people's greenhouse gas emissions.^[39][40]

Intergenerational equity

Further information: intergenerational equity

The nations and the world population need to make changes, including sacrifices (like uncomfortable lifestyle-changes,^[41][42] alterations to public spending and changes to choice of work), today to enable climate justice for future generations.^[43]

Preventable severe effects of climate change are likely to occur during the lifetime of the present adult population. Under current climate policy pledges, children born in 2020 (e.g. "Generation Alpha") will experience over their lifetimes, 2–7 times as many heat waves, as well as more of other extreme weather events compared to people born in 1960. This, along with other projections, raises issues of intergenerational equity as it was these generations (specific groups and individuals and their collective governance and perpetuated economics) who are mainly responsible for the burden of climate change.^[44][45]

This illustrates that emissions produced by any given generation can lock-in damage for one or more future generations, making climate change progressively more threatening for the generations affected than for the generation responsible for the threats. The climate system contains tipping points, such as the amount of deforestation of the Amazon that will launch the forest’s irreversible decline.^[46][47] A generation whose continued emissions drive the climate system past such significant tipping points inflicts severe injustice on multiple future generations.^[48]

Disproportionate impacts on disadvantaged groups

Further information: Climate change vulnerability

Disadvantaged groups will continue to be disproportionately impacted as climate change persists. These groups will be affected due to inequalities based on demographic characteristics such as differences in gender, race, ethnicity, age, and income.^[49] Inequality increases the exposure of disadvantaged groups to harmful effects of climate change while also increasing their susceptibility to destruction caused by climate change.^[49] The damage is worsened because disadvantaged groups are last to receive emergency relief and are rarely included in the planning process at local, national and international levels for coping with the impacts of climate change.^[50]

Communities of color, women, indigenous groups, and people of low-income all face higher vulnerability to climate change.^[51][14] These groups will be disproportionately impacted by heat waves, air quality, and extreme weather events.^[52] Women are also disadvantaged and will be affected by climate change differently than men.^[53] This may impact the ability of minority groups to adapt, unless steps are taken to provide these groups with more access to universal resources.^[54] Indigenous groups are affected by the consequences of climate change even though they historically have contributed the least to causing it.^[52] Indigenous peoples are unjustifiably impacted due to their low income, and continue to have fewer resources to cope with climate change.^[55]

Responses to improve climate justice

Burden on future generations

     One generation must not be allowed to consume large portions of the CO₂ budget while bearing a relatively minor share of the reduction effort if this would involve leaving subsequent generations with a drastic reduction burden and expose their lives to comprehensive losses of freedom.

— German Federal Constitutional Court
April 2021^[56]

Conclusion on the Rights of Nature

     The rights of nature protect ecosystems and natural processes for their intrinsic value, thus complementing them with the human right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. The rights of nature, like all constitutional rights, are justiciable and, consequently, judges are obliged to guarantee them.

— Constitutional Court of Ecuador^[57][58]
10 November 2021

Common principles of justice in burden-sharing

There are three common principles of justice in burden-sharing that can be used in making decisions on who bears the larger burdens of climate change globally and domestically: a) those who most caused the problem, b) those who have the most burden-carrying ability and c) those who have benefited most from the activities that cause climate change.^[59] Observing calls for climate reparations in scientific literature, among climate movements and in policy debates, a 2023 study estimated that the top 21 fossil fuel companies would owe cumulative climate reparations of $5.4 trillion over the period 2025–2050.^[60]

Another method of deciding-making starts from the objective of preventing climate change e.g. beyond 1.5 °C, and from there reasons backwards to who should do what.^[61] This makes use of the principles of justice in burden-sharing to maintain fairness.

Court cases and litigation

 

In 2019, the Supreme Court of the Netherlands confirmed that the government must cut carbon dioxide emissions further, as climate change threatens citizens' human rights.^[62]

By December 2022, the number of climate change-related lawsuits had grown to 2,180, more than half in the U.S (1,522 lawsuits).^[63] Based on existing laws, some relevant parties can already be forced into action (to the degree of accountability, monitoring and law enforcement capacities and assessments of feasibility) by means of courts.^[62]

This section is an excerpt from Climate change litigation.[edit]

Climate change litigation, also known as climate litigation, is an emerging body of environmental law using legal practice to set case law precedent to further climate change mitigation efforts from public institutions, such as governments and companies. In the face of slow climate change politics delaying climate change mitigation, activists and lawyers have increased efforts to use national and international judiciary systems to advance the effort. Climate litigation typically engages in one of five types of legal claims:^[64] Constitutional law (focused on breaches of constitutional rights by the state),^[65] administrative law (challenging the merits of administrative decision making), private law (challenging corporations or other organizations for negligence, nuisance, etc., fraud or consumer protection (challenging companies for misrepresenting information about climate impacts), or human rights (claiming that failure to act on climate change is a failure to protect human rights).^[66]

 

Rally for climate justice: Mass mobilization at the Chevron Oil Refinery in Richmond, California (2009)

 

Tens of thousands marching in Copenhagen for climate justice (2009)^[67]

Human rights

The COP26 Climate Change Conference...

     ... acknowledging that climate change is a common concern of humankind, Parties should, when taking action to address climate change, respect, promote and consider their respective obligations on human rights, the right to health, the rights of indigenous peoples, local communities, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable situations and the right to development, as well as gender equality, empowerment of women and intergenerational equity, ...

— The Glasgow climate pact^[68]
13 November 2021

This section is an excerpt from Human rights and climate change.[edit]

Human rights and climate change is a conceptual and legal framework under which international human rights and their relationship to global warming are studied, analyzed, and addressed.^[69] The framework has been employed by governments, United Nations organizations, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, human rights and environmental advocates, and academics to guide national and international policy on climate change under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the core international human rights instruments.^[70][71][72] In 2022 Working Group II of the IPCC suggested that "climate justice comprises justice that links development and human rights to achieve a rights-based approach to addressing climate change".^[73]

Challenges

Societal disruption and policy support

See also: Yellow vests protests § Fuel prices

Climate justice may often conflict with social stability. For example, interventions that establish more just product pricing could result in social unrest^[74].^[75] Socioeconomic decarbonization interventions could lead to decreased material possessions, number of freely choosable options, comfort, maintained habits and salaries,^{[29][additional citation(s) needed]} and also temporary increased unemployment rates. This may be problematic with current socioeconomic structures.^[76]

However, multiple studies estimate that if a rapid transition were to be implemented in certain ways the number of full-time jobs formally recognized in the economy could increase overall at least temporarily due to increased demand for labor to e.g. build public infrastructure and other green jobs to build the renewable energy system.^[77][78][79]

The urgent need for and extent of policies, especially when seeking to facilitate lifestyle-changes and shifts on an industry scale, could lead to social tension and decrease levels of public support for political parties in power.^[80][81] For instance, keeping gas prices low is often "really good for the poor and the middle class".^[82]

Loss and damage discussions

See also: Loss and damage (climate change)

Some may see climate justice arguments for compensation by rich countries for disasters and similar problems in developing countries (as well as for domestic disasters) as a way for "limitless liability" by which at least high levels of compensations could drain a society's resources, efforts, focus and financial funds away from efficient preventive climate change mitigation towards e.g. immediate climate change relief compensations or climate-unrelated expenses of the receiving country or people.^[83][84]

Fossil-fuels dependent states

Further information: Fossil fuel phase-out § Assessment of extraction prevention responsibilities, and Carbon budget

 

The US, China and Russia have cumulatively contributed the greatest amounts of CO₂ since 1850.^[85]

 

Many of the heaviest users of fossil fuels rely on them for a high percentage of their electricity.^[86]

Fossil fuel phase out is projected to affect states and their citizens with large or central industries of fossil-fuels extraction – including OPEC states – differently than other nations. These states have obstructed climate negotiations and it has been argued that, due to their wealth, they should not need to receive financial support from other countries but could implement adequate transitions on their own in terms of financial resources.^[87][88][89]

A study suggested governments of nations that have historically benefited from extraction should take the lead, with countries that have a high dependency on fossil fuels but low capacity for transition needing some support to follow.^[90] In particular, transitional impacts of a rapid extraction phase out is thought to be better absorbed in diversified, wealthier economies that should bear discrepancies in costs needed for a "just transition" as they are most able to bear it and may have better capacities for enacting absorptive socioeconomic policies.^[91]

Conflicting interest-driven interpretations as barriers to agreements

 

Net income of the global oil and gas industry reached a record US$4 trillion in 2022.^[92]

See also: Group decision-making § Formal systems

Different interpretations and perspectives, arising from different interests, needs, circumstances, expectations, considerations and histories, can lead to highly varying ideas of what is "fair". This may make it more difficult for countries to reach an agreement, similar to the prisoner's dilemma.^[93] Developing effective, legitimate and enforceable agreements could thereby be substantially complicated, especially if traditional methods or tools of policy-making are used, in-sum trusted third party expert authorities are absent and the scientific research base relevant for the decision-making – such as studies and data about the problem, potential mitigation measures and capacities – is not robust. Fundamental fairness principles could include:

 

After recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic, energy company profits increased with greater revenues from higher fuel prices resulting from the Russian invasion of Ukraine, falling debt levels, tax write-downs of projects shut down in Russia, and backing off from earlier plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.^[94] Record profits sparked public calls for windfall taxes.^[94]

• Responsibility
• Capability and
• Rights (needs)

for which country characteristics can predict relative support.^{[95][additional citation(s) needed]} The shared problem-characteristics of climate change could incentivize developing countries to act in concert to deter developed countries from "passing their climate costs onto them" and thereby improve the global mitigation effectiveness to 1.5 °C.^[96]

History

Developed countries, as the main cause of climate change, in assuming their historical responsibility, must recognize and honor their climate debt in all of its dimensions as the basis for a just, effective, and scientific solution to climate change. (...) The focus must not be only on financial compensation, but also on restorative justice, understood as the restitution of integrity to our Mother Earth and all its beings.

World People's Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, People's Agreement, April 2010, Cochabamba, Bolivia^[97]

 

Though the U.S.'s per capita and per GDP emissions have declined significantly, the raw numerical decline in emissions is much less substantial.^[98] Growing populations and increased economic activity work against mitigation attempts.

The concept of climate justice was deeply influential on climate negotiations years before the term "climate justice" was regularly applied to the concept. In December 1990 the United Nations appointed an Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC) to draft what became the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC), adopted at the UN Conference on the Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992.^[99]  As the name “Environment and Development” indicated, the fundamental goal was to coordinate action on climate change with action on sustainable development. It was impossible to draft the text of the FCCC without confronting central questions of climate justice concerning how to share the responsibilities of slowing climate change fairly between developed nations and developing nations. 

The issue of the fair terms for sharing responsibility was raised forcefully for the INC by statements about climate justice from developing countries.^[100] In response, the FCCC adopted the now-famous (and still-contentious) principles of climate justice embodied in Article 3.1:^[101] "The Parties should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. Accordingly, the developed country Parties should take the lead in combating climate change and the adverse effects thereof."  The first principle of climate justice embedded in Article 3.1 is that calculations of benefits (and burdens) must include not only those for the present generation but also those for future generations. The second is that responsibilities are "common but differentiated", that is, every country has some responsibilities, but equitable responsibilities are different for different types of countries. The third is that a crucial instance of different responsibilities is that in fairness developed countries' responsibilities must be greater. How much greater continues to be debated politically.^[102][103]

In 2000, at the same time as the Sixth Conference of the Parties (COP 6), the first Climate Justice Summit took place in The Hague. This summit aimed to "affirm that climate change is a rights issue" and to "build alliances across states and borders" against climate change and in favor of sustainable development.^[104]

Subsequently, in August–September 2002, international environmental groups met in Johannesburg for the Earth Summit.^[105] At this summit, also known as Rio+10, as it took place ten years after the 1992 Earth Summit, the Bali Principles of Climate Justice^[106] were adopted.

Climate Justice affirms the rights of communities dependent on natural resources for their livelihood and cultures to own and manage the same in a sustainable manner, and is opposed to the commodification of nature and its resources.

Bali Principles of Climate Justice, article 18, August 29, 2002^[106]

In 2004, the Durban Group for Climate Justice was formed at an international meeting in Durban, South Africa. Here representatives from NGOs and peoples' movements discussed realistic policies for addressing climate change.^[107]

In 2007 at the 13th Conference of the Parties (COP 13) in Bali, the global coalition Climate Justice Now! was founded, and, in 2008, the Global Humanitarian Forum focused on climate justice at its inaugural meeting in Geneva.^[108]

In 2009, the Climate Justice Action Network was formed during the run-up to the Copenhagen Summit.^[109] It proposed civil disobedience and direct action during the summit, and many climate activists used the slogan 'system change not climate change'.^[110]

In April 2010, the World People's Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth took place in Tiquipaya, Bolivia. It was hosted by the government of Bolivia as a global gathering of civil society and governments. The conference published a "People's Agreement" calling, among other things, for greater climate justice.^[97]

In September 2013 the Climate Justice Dialogue convened by the Mary Robinson Foundation and the World Resources Institute released their Declaration on Climate Justice in an appeal to those drafting the proposed agreement to be negotiated at COP-21 in Paris in 2015.^[111]

In December 2018, the People's Demands for Climate Justice, signed by 292,000 individuals and 366 organizations, called upon government delegates at COP24 to comply with a list of six climate justice demands.^[112] One of the demands was to "Ensure developed countries honor their “Fair Shares” for largely fueling this crisis."

Some advance was achieved at the Paris climate finance summit at June 2023. The World Bank allowed to low income countries temporarily stop paying debts if they are hit by climate disaster. Most of financial help to climate vulnerable countries is coming in the form of debts, what often worsens the situation as those countries are overburdened with debts. Around 300 billion dollars was pledged as financial help in the next years, but trillions are needed to really solve the problem.^[113][114] More than 100 leading economists signed a letter calling for an extreme wealth tax as a solution (2% tax can generate around 2.5 trillion). It can serve as a loss and damage mechanism as the 1% of richest people is responsible for twice as many emissions as the poorest 50%.^[115]

Examples

Subsistence farmers in Latin America

Several studies that investigated the impacts of climate change on agriculture in Latin America suggest that in the poorer countries of Latin America, agriculture composes the most important economic sector and the primary form of sustenance for small farmers.^[116][117] Maize is the only grain still produced as a sustenance crop on small farms in Latin American nations.^[116] The projected decrease of this grain and other crops can threaten the welfare and the economic development of subsistence communities in Latin America.^[118][116] Food security is of particular concern to rural areas that have weak or non-existent food markets to rely on in the case food shortages.^[119] In August 2019, Honduras declared a state of emergency when a drought caused the southern part of the country to lose 72% of its corn and 75% of its beans. Food security issues are expected to worsen across Central America due to climate change. It is predicted that by 2070, corn yields in Central America may fall by 10%, beans by 29%, and rice by 14%. With Central American crop consumption dominated by corn (70%), beans (25%), and rice (6%), the expected drop in staple crop yields could have devastating consequences.^[120]

The expected impacts of climate change on subsistence farmers in Latin America and other developing regions are unjust for two reasons.^[117][121] First, subsistence farmers in developing countries, including those in Latin America are disproportionately vulnerable to climate change^[121] Second, these nations were the least responsible for causing the problem of anthropogenic induced climate.^{[121][better source needed]}

Disproportionate vulnerability to climate disasters is socially determined.^[117][121] For example, socioeconomic and policy trends affecting smallholder and subsistence farmers limit their capacity to adapt to change.^[117] A history of policies and economic dynamics has negatively impacted rural farmers.^[116] During the 1950s and through the 1980s, high inflation and appreciated real exchange rates reduced the value of agricultural exports.^[116] As a result, farmers in Latin America received lower prices for their products compared to world market prices.^[116] Following these outcomes, Latin American policies and national crop programs aimed to stimulate agricultural intensification.^[116] These national crop programs benefitted larger commercial farmers more. In the 1980s and 1990s low world market prices for cereals and livestock resulted in decreased agricultural growth and increased rural poverty.^[116]

Perceived vulnerability to climate change differs even within communities, as in the example of subsistence farmers in Calakmul, Mexico.^[122]

Adaptive planning is challenged by the difficulty of predicting local scale climate change impacts.^[117] A crucial component to adaptation should include government efforts to lessen the effects of food shortages and famines.^[123] Planning for equitable adaptation and agricultural sustainability will require the engagement of farmers in decision making processes.^[123]

Hurricane Katrina

 

A house is crushed and swept off its foundations by flooding from a breached levee in the Ninth Ward, New Orleans, Louisiana, due to a storm surge from Hurricane Katrina. Around 90% of the Ninth Ward's population is black.

Further information: Tropical cyclones and climate change

Due to climate change, tropical cyclones are expected to increase in intensity and have increased rainfall, and have larger storm surges, but there might be fewer of them globally. These changes are driven by rising sea temperatures and increased maximum water vapour content of the atmosphere as the air heats up.^[124] Hurricane Katrina in 2005 showed how climate change disasters affect different people individually,^[125] as it had a disproportionate effect on low-income and minority groups.^[125] A study on the race and class dimensions of Hurricane Katrina suggests that those most vulnerable include poor, black, brown, elderly, sick, and homeless people.^[126] Low-income and black communities had little resources and limited mobility to evacuate before the storm.^[127][128] After the hurricane, low-income communities were most affected by contamination,^[125] and this was made worse by the fact that government relief measures failed to adequately assist those most at risk.^[129][126]

See also

• Climate debt
• Climate reparations
• Environmental racism
• Global Justice Movement
• Greenhouse Development Rights
• International law
• Just transition

References

1. "What is Climate Justice?". Global Witness. 2 December 2021. Retrieved 25 October 2023.
2. "Climate Equality: A Planet For the 99%" (PDF). Oxfam. November 2023. Retrieved 24 November 2023.
3. Schlosberg, David; Collins, Lisette B. (May 2014). "From environmental to climate justice: climate change and the discourse of environmental justice". WIREs Climate Change. 5 (3): 359–374. Bibcode:2014WIRCC...5..359S. doi:10.1002/wcc.275. ISSN 1757-7780. S2CID 145546565.
4. "Kofi Annan launches climate justice campaign track". Global Humanitarian Forum. 1 October 2009. from the original on 15 July 2011. Retrieved 11 May 2022.
5. Koch, Wendy (7 March 2011). "Study: Climate change affects those least responsible". USA Today. from the original on 7 December 2015.
6. . Archived from the original on 19 December 2018. In wealthy countries, the looming climate crisis is a matter of concern, as it will affect the wellbeing of the economy. But in Africa, which is hardly contributing to climate change in the first place, it will be a matter of life and death.
7. Newell, Peter; Srivastava, Shilpi; Naess, Lars Otto; Torres Contreras, Gerardo A.; Price, Roz (July 2020). "Towards Transformative Climate Justice: Key Challenges and Future Directions for Research" (PDF). Working Paper Volume 2020 (540). Sussex, UK: Institute for Development Studies. hdl:20.500.12413/15497. (PDF) from the original on 16 November 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2022.
8. Policy Innovations for Transformative Change: Implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (PDF) (Report). Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD). 2016. ISBN 9789290850984. (PDF) from the original on 19 May 2022. Retrieved 11 May 2022.
9. Jafry, Tahseen, ed. (2019). Routledge handbook of climate justice. Abingdon, Oxon. ISBN 9781315537689. OCLC 1056201868.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
10. Powers, Melissa (4 December 2019). "Energy transition: reforming social metabolism". Research Handbook on Global Climate Constitutionalism. doi:10.4337/9781788115810.00020. ISBN 9781788115810. S2CID 213458540.
11. . Climate Justice Programme. Archived from the original on 9 April 2011.
12. Jolly, Patricia (9 October 2018). "Les Pays-Bas sommés par la justice d'intensifier leur lutte contre le changement climatique" [The Netherlands ordered by the courts to step up its fight against climate change]. Le Monde (in French). from the original on 12 October 2018. Retrieved 18 October 2018.
13. Manzo, Rosa (19 March 2021). "Climate Equity or Climate Justice? More than a question of terminology". International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). from the original on 28 September 2022.
14. "AR6 Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability — IPCC". from the original on 18 March 2022. Retrieved 18 March 2022.
15. "Historical GHG Emissions / Global Historical Emissions". ClimateWatchData.org. Climate Watch. 2021. from the original on 21 May 2021. ● Population data from "List of the populations of the world's countries, dependencies, and territories". britannica.com. Encyclopedia Britannica. from the original on 26 June 2021.
16. Chart based on: Milman, Oliver (12 July 2022). "Nearly $2tn of damage inflicted on other countries by US emissions". The Guardian. from the original on 12 July 2022. Guardian cites Callahan, Christopher W.; Mankin, Justin S. (12 July 2022). "National attribution of historical climate damages". Climatic Change. 172 (40): 40. Bibcode:2022ClCh..172...40C. doi:10.1007/s10584-022-03387-y. S2CID 250430339.
17. Collective, Building Bridges (July 2010). (PDF). Footprint Workers Co-op [printers]. ISBN 9780853162940. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 August 2016. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help)
18. "Is a Successful Ecological Turnaround of Capitalism Possible?". from the original on 17 December 2018. Retrieved 6 April 2016.
19. Mitchell, Timothy (2011). Carbon democracy : political power in the age of oil. London. ISBN 978-1-84467-896-9. OCLC 882609648. from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 20 March 2022.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
20. Newell, Peter; Srivastava, Shilpi; Naess, Lars Otto; Contreras, Gerardo A. Torres; Price, Roz (2021). "Toward transformative climate justice: An emerging research agenda". WIREs Climate Change. 12 (6): e733. Bibcode:2021WIRCC..12E.733N. doi:10.1002/wcc.733. ISSN 1757-7799. S2CID 238789301. from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 16 November 2021.
21. Sardo, Michael Christopher (14 September 2020). "Responsibility for climate justice: Political not moral". European Journal of Political Theory. 22: 26–50. doi:10.1177/1474885120955148. ISSN 1474-8851. S2CID 224971164.
22. Goh, Kian (2 April 2020). "Planning the Green New Deal: Climate Justice and the Politics of Sites and Scales". Journal of the American Planning Association. 86 (2): 188–195. doi:10.1080/01944363.2019.1688671. ISSN 0194-4363. S2CID 212762011.
23. Aitken M, Christman B, Bonaventura M, van der Horst D, Holbrook J (2016). "Climate Justice Begins at Home: Conceptual, Pragmatic and Transformative Approaches to Climate Justice in Scotland". Scottish Affairs. 25 (2): 225–252. doi:10.3366/SCOT.2016.0128. hdl:20.500.11820/9385e844-d046-41db-80e9-6c8e68d3e3dd. (PDF) from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 30 May 2022.
24. "Emissions Gap Report 2020 / Executive Summary" (PDF). United Nations Environment Programme. 2021. p. XV Fig. ES.8. (PDF) from the original on 31 July 2021.
25. Cozzi, Laura; Chen, Olivia; Kim, Hyeji (22 February 2023). "The world's top 1% of emitters produce over 1000 times more CO2 than the bottom 1%". iea.org. International Energy Agency (IEA). from the original on 3 March 2023. "Methodological note: ... The analysis accounts for energy-related CO2, and not other greenhouse gases, nor those related to land use and agriculture."
26. Stevens, Harry (1 March 2023). "The United States has caused the most global warming. When will China pass it?". The Washington Post. from the original on 1 March 2023.
27. "Climate change: More than 3bn could live in extreme heat by 2070". BBC News. 5 May 2020. from the original on 5 May 2020. Retrieved 6 May 2020.
28. Xu, Chi; Kohler, Timothy A.; Lenton, Timothy M.; Svenning, Jens-Christian; Scheffer, Marten (26 May 2020). "Future of the human climate niche – Supplementary Materials". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 117 (21): 11350–11355. Bibcode:2020PNAS..11711350X. doi:10.1073/pnas.1910114117. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 7260949. PMID 32366654.
29. Wiedmann, Thomas; Lenzen, Manfred; Keyßer, Lorenz T.; Steinberger, Julia K. (19 June 2020). "Scientists' warning on affluence". Nature Communications. 11 (1): 3107. Bibcode:2020NatCo..11.3107W. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-16941-y. ISSN 2041-1723. PMC 7305220. PMID 32561753.
30. Nielsen, Kristian S.; Nicholas, Kimberly A.; Creutzig, Felix; Dietz, Thomas; Stern, Paul C. (30 September 2021). "The role of high-socioeconomic-status people in locking in or rapidly reducing energy-driven greenhouse gas emissions". Nature Energy. 6 (11): 1011–1016. Bibcode:2021NatEn...6.1011N. doi:10.1038/s41560-021-00900-y. ISSN 2058-7546. S2CID 244191460.
31. Gore, Tim (23 September 2020). "Confronting carbon inequality". Oxfam International. from the original on 24 March 2022. Retrieved 20 March 2022.
32. Kartha, Sivan; Kemp-Benedict, Eric; Ghosh, Emily; Nazareth, Anisha; Gore, Tim (September 2020). "The Carbon Inequality Era: An assessment of the global distribution of consumption emissions among individuals from 1990 to 2015 and beyond" (PDF). Stockholm Environment Institute. (PDF) from the original on 22 January 2022. Retrieved 11 May 2022.
33. Clifford, Catherine (26 January 2021). "The '1%' are the main drivers of climate change, but it hits the poor the hardest: Oxfam report". CNBC. from the original on 28 October 2021. Retrieved 28 October 2021.
34. Berkhout, Esmé; Galasso, Nick; Lawson, Max; Rivero Morales, Pablo Andrés; Taneja, Anjela; Vázquez Pimentel, Diego Alejo (25 January 2021). "The Inequality Virus". Oxfam International. from the original on 28 October 2021. Retrieved 28 October 2021.
35. Paddison, Laura (28 October 2021). "How the rich are driving climate change". BBC. from the original on 5 November 2021. Retrieved 7 November 2021.
36. Watts, Jonathan (20 November 2023). "Richest 1% account for more carbon emissions than poorest 66%, report says". The Guardian. from the original on 15 August 2023. Retrieved 21 November 2023.
37. Carrington, Damian (20 November 2023). "Revealed: the huge climate impact of the middle classes". The Guardian. from the original on 20 November 2023. Retrieved 21 November 2023.
38. Oswald, Yannick; Owen, Anne; Steinberger, Julia K. (March 2020). "Large inequality in international and intranational energy footprints between income groups and across consumption categories" (PDF). Nature Energy. 5 (3): 231–239. Bibcode:2020NatEn...5..231O. doi:10.1038/s41560-020-0579-8. ISSN 2058-7546. S2CID 216245301. (PDF) from the original on 28 October 2021. Retrieved 16 November 2021.
39. "Global Warming May Result in a Billion Premature Deaths by 2100: Study | Weather.com". The Weather Channel. Retrieved 10 September 2023.
40. Pearce, Joshua M.; Parncutt, Richard (2023). "Quantifying Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Human Deaths to Guide Energy Policy". Energies. 16 (16): 6074. doi:10.3390/en16166074. ISSN 1996-1073.
41. Fragnière, Augustin (2016). "Climate change and individual duties". WIREs Climate Change. 7 (6): 798–814. Bibcode:2016WIRCC...7..798F. doi:10.1002/wcc.422. ISSN 1757-7799. S2CID 156177435.
42. Thaller, Annina; Fleiß, Eva; Brudermann, Thomas (1 December 2020). "No glory without sacrifice — drivers of climate (in)action in the general population". Environmental Science & Policy. 114: 7–13. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2020.07.014. ISSN 1462-9011. S2CID 225022617.
43. Puaschunder, Julia M. (7 May 2017). "Climate in the 21st Century: A Macroeconomic Model of Fair Global Warming Benefits Distribution to Grant Climate Justice Around the World and over Time". Proceedings of the 8th International RAIS Conference on Social Sciences and Humanities Organized by Research Association for Interdisciplinary Studies (RAIS). doi:10.2139/ssrn.2964385. hdl:10125/51976. S2CID 157469780. SSRN 2964385.
44. Gramling, Carolyn (1 October 2021). "2020 babies may suffer up to seven times as many extreme heat waves as 1960s kids". Science News. from the original on 11 May 2022. Retrieved 18 October 2021.
45. Thiery, Wim; Lange, Stefan; Rogelj, Joeri; Schleussner, Carl-Friedrich; Gudmundsson, Lukas; Seneviratne, Sonia I.; Andrijevic, Marina; Frieler, Katja; Emanuel, Kerry; Geiger, Tobias; Bresch, David N.; Zhao, Fang; Willner, Sven N.; Büchner, Matthias; Volkholz, Jan; Bauer, Nico; Chang, Jinfeng; Ciais, Philippe; Dury, Marie; François, Louis; Grillakis, Manolis; Gosling, Simon N.; Hanasaki, Naota; Hickler, Thomas; Huber, Veronika; Ito, Akihiko; Jägermeyr, Jonas; Khabarov, Nikolay; Koutroulis, Aristeidis; Liu, Wenfeng; Lutz, Wolfgang; Mengel, Matthias; Müller, Christoph; Ostberg, Sebastian; Reyer, Christopher P. O.; Stacke, Tobias; Wada, Yoshihide (8 October 2021). "Intergenerational inequities in exposure to climate extremes". Science. 374 (6564): 158–160. Bibcode:2021Sci...374..158T. doi:10.1126/science.abi7339. PMID 34565177. S2CID 237942847. from the original on 11 May 2022. Retrieved 28 October 2021.
46. Lenton, Timothy M.; Rockström, Johan; Gaffney, Owen; Rahmstorf, Stefan; Richardson, Katherine; Steffen, Will; Schellnhuber, Hans Joachim (28 November 2019). "Climate tipping points — too risky to bet against". Nature. 575 (7784): 592–595. Bibcode:2019Natur.575..592L. doi:10.1038/d41586-019-03595-0. hdl:10871/40141. ISSN 0028-0836. PMID 31776487. S2CID 208330359. from the original on 19 March 2022. Retrieved 18 March 2022.
47. Fountain, Henry (7 March 2022). "Amazon Is Less Able to Recover From Droughts and Logging, Study Finds". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. from the original on 18 March 2022. Retrieved 18 March 2022.
48. Shue, Henry (2021). The pivotal generation : why we have a moral responsibility to slow climate change right now. Princeton, New Jersey. ISBN 978-0-691-22007-9. OCLC 1245960372. from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 18 March 2022.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
49. Islam, S. Nazrul; Winkel, John (2017). Climate Change and Social Inequality (PDF). New York: UN DESA. (PDF) from the original on 16 January 2019. Retrieved 31 October 2019.
50. Baird, Rachel (April 2008). "Impact of Climate Change on Minorities and Indigenous Peoples" (PDF). (PDF) from the original on 20 May 2019.
51. Robinson, Mary (2018). Climate justice : hope, resilience, and the fight for a sustainable future. New York. ISBN 978-1-63286-928-9. OCLC 1019922693. from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 19 March 2022.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
52. Fourth National Climate Assessment (Report). U.S. Global Change Research Program. 2018. pp. 1–470. from the original on 30 December 2018. Retrieved 31 October 2019.
53. Pearson, Adam R.; Ballew, Matthew T.; Naiman, Sarah; Schuldt, Jonathon P. (26 April 2017). "Race, Class, Gender and Climate Change Communication". Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.412. ISBN 9780190228620. from the original on 11 March 2020. Retrieved 31 October 2019.
54. Fourth National Climate Assessment. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Report). from the original on 27 October 2019.
55. "Indigenous Peoples Disproportionately Impacted by Climate Change, Systematically Targeted for Defending Freedoms, Speakers Tell Permanent Forum | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases". www.un.org. 18 April 2018. from the original on 31 October 2019. Retrieved 31 October 2019.
56. Jordans, Frank (29 April 2021). "Court: Germany must share climate burden between young, old". Associated Press. from the original on 29 April 2021. ● "Verfassungsbeschwerden gegen das Klimaschutzgesetz teilweise erfolgreich (Constitutional complaints against the Climate Protection Act partially successful)". bundesverfassungsgericht.de (in German). Bundesverfassungsgerichts (Federal Constitutional Court). 29 April 2021. from the original on 3 May 2021.
57. "CASO No. 1149-19-JP/20". CorteConstitucional.gob.ec (in Spanish). Constitutional Court of Ecuador. 10 November 2021. pp. VI. Conclusiones. from the original on 2 December 2021.
58. Surma, Katie (3 December 2021). . Inside Climate News. Archived from the original on 3 December 2021. In a case involving mining in a protected region of the Ecuadorian rainforest, the Constitutional Court of Ecuador issued a landmark decision interpreting the country’s constitutional provisions to grant rights and confer protections to ecosystems.
59. Caney, Simon (2021). "Climate Justice". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2021 ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. from the original on 18 March 2022. Retrieved 18 March 2022.
60. Grasso, Marco; Heede, Richard (19 May 2023). "Time to pay the piper: Fossil fuel companies' reparations for climate damages". One Earth. 6 (5): 459–463. Bibcode:2023OEart...6..459G. doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2023.04.012. hdl:10281/416137. S2CID 258809532.
61. Caney, Simon (2014). "Two Kinds of Climate Justice: Avoiding Harm and Sharing Burdens". Journal of Political Philosophy. 22 (2): 125–149. doi:10.1111/jopp.12030. ISSN 1467-9760.
62. Isabella Kaminski (20 December 2019). "Dutch supreme court upholds landmark ruling demanding climate action". The Guardian. from the original on 20 December 2019. Retrieved 20 December 2019.
63. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law (2023). "Global Climate Litigation Report / 2023 Status Review" (PDF). p. XIV. (PDF) from the original on 29 July 2023.
64. King; Mallett, Wood Mallesons-Daisy; Nagra, Sati (27 February 2020). "Climate change litigation - what is it and what to expect? | Lexology". www.lexology.com. from the original on 14 April 2021. Retrieved 20 September 2020.
65. Pasquale Viola (29 March 2022). Climate Constitutionalism Momentum: Adaptive Legal Systems. Springer Nature. ISBN 978-3-03-097336-0. from the original on 16 March 2024. Retrieved 5 May 2022.
66. Orangias, Joseph (1 December 2021). "Towards global public trust doctrines: an analysis of the transnationalisation of state stewardship duties". Transnational Legal Theory. 12 (4): 550–586. doi:10.1080/20414005.2021.2006030. S2CID 244864136.
67. van der Zee, Bibi; Batty, David (12 December 2009). . The Guardian. Archived from the original on 20 March 2018.
68. Washington Post Staff (13 November 2021). "The Glasgow climate pact, annotated". The Washington Post. from the original on 14 November 2021.
69. Stephen Humphreys, ed. (2010). Human rights and climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-511-76998-6. OCLC 652432164.
70. "New UN Report Details Link between Climate Change and Human Rights". UN Environment. 5 October 2017. Retrieved 20 March 2022.
71. "Report of the Human Rights Council on its thirty-first session. Advance unedited version". Human Rights Council. 22 July 2016. Retrieved 17 August 2022.
72. Rajamani, Lavanya (26 June 2019). "Integrating Human Rights in the Paris Climate Architecture: Contest, Context, and Consequence". Climate Law. 9 (3): 180–201. doi:10.1163/18786561-00903003. ISSN 1878-6553. S2CID 199289341.
73. "AR6 Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability — IPCC". Retrieved 20 March 2022.
74. Martin, Mathilde; Islar, Mine (1 March 2021). "The 'end of the world' vs. the 'end of the month': understanding social resistance to sustainability transition agendas, a lesson from the Yellow Vests in France". Sustainability Science. 16 (2): 601–614. Bibcode:2021SuSc...16..601M. doi:10.1007/s11625-020-00877-9. ISSN 1862-4057. S2CID 226303592.
75. Brown, Benjamin; Spiegel, Samuel J. (1 May 2019). "Coal, Climate Justice, and the Cultural Politics of Energy Transition". Global Environmental Politics. 19 (2): 149–168. doi:10.1162/glep_a_00501. ISSN 1526-3800. S2CID 207550608.
76. Kalt, Tobias (24 February 2021). "Jobs vs. climate justice? Contentious narratives of labor and climate movements in the coal transition in Germany". Environmental Politics. 30 (7): 1135–1154. Bibcode:2021EnvPo..30.1135K. doi:10.1080/09644016.2021.1892979. ISSN 0964-4016. S2CID 233917142.
77. Ram, Manish; Osorio-Aravena, Juan Carlos; Aghahosseini, Arman; Bogdanov, Dmitrii; Breyer, Christian (1 January 2022). "Job creation during a climate compliant global energy transition across the power, heat, transport, and desalination sectors by 2050". Energy. 238: 121690. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2021.121690. ISSN 0360-5442.
78. Dell’Anna, Federico (1 February 2021). "Green jobs and energy efficiency as strategies for economic growth and the reduction of environmental impacts". Energy Policy. 149: 112031. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2020.112031. ISSN 0301-4215. S2CID 230525373.
79. Jacobson, Mark Z.; Delucchi, Mark A.; Cameron, Mary A.; Coughlin, Stephen J.; Hay, Catherine A.; Manogaran, Indu Priya; Shu, Yanbo; von Krauland, Anna-Katharina (20 December 2019). "Impacts of Green New Deal Energy Plans on Grid Stability, Costs, Jobs, Health, and Climate in 143 Countries". One Earth. 1 (4): 449–463. Bibcode:2019AGUFMPA32A..01J. doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2019.12.003. ISSN 2590-3322. S2CID 210964561.
80. Drews, Stefan; van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M. (2 October 2016). "What explains public support for climate policies? A review of empirical and experimental studies". Climate Policy. 16 (7): 855–876. Bibcode:2016CliPo..16..855D. doi:10.1080/14693062.2015.1058240. ISSN 1469-3062. S2CID 155760317.
81. Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle (1 July 2011). "Citizens as veto players: climate change policy and the constraints of direct democracy". Environmental Politics. 20 (4): 485–507. Bibcode:2011EnvPo..20..485S. doi:10.1080/09644016.2011.589577. ISSN 0964-4016. S2CID 155026745.
82. "The moral element of climate change". Stanford News. University of Stanford. 23 February 2017. from the original on 7 November 2021. Retrieved 7 November 2021.
83. Mathiesen, Karl (20 November 2013). "Climate talks: Should rich countries pay for damage caused by global warming?". The Guardian. from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 3 November 2021.
84. Kopra, Sanna (November 2019). "Responsibility for climate justice: the role of great powers" (PDF). University of Helsinki. hdl:10138/314725. (PDF) from the original on 9 November 2021. Retrieved 3 November 2021.
85. Evans, Simon (5 October 2021). "Analysis: Which countries are historically responsible for climate change? / Historical responsibility for climate change is at the heart of debates over climate justice". CarbonBrief.org. Carbon Brief. from the original on 26 October 2021. Source: Carbon Brief analysis of figures from the Global Carbon Project, CDIAC, Our World in Data, Carbon Monitor, Houghton and Nassikas (2017) and Hansis et al (2015).
86. Data: BP Statistical Review of World Energy, and Ember Climate (3 November 2021). "Electricity consumption from fossil fuels, nuclear and renewables, 2020". OurWorldInData.org. Our World in Data consolidated data from BP and Ember. from the original on 3 November 2021.
87. Muttitt, Greg; Kartha, Sivan (13 September 2020). "Equity, climate justice and fossil fuel extraction: principles for a managed phase out" (PDF). Climate Policy. 20 (8): 1024–1042. Bibcode:2020CliPo..20.1024M. doi:10.1080/14693062.2020.1763900. ISSN 1469-3062. S2CID 219681770. (PDF) from the original on 8 November 2021. Retrieved 8 November 2021.
88. Funnell, Dominica (4 November 2021). "Australia dodges pledge to phase out coal by 2030s". SkyNews. from the original on 7 November 2021. Retrieved 8 November 2021.
89. "COP26: Document leak reveals nations lobbying to change key climate report". BBC News. 21 October 2021. from the original on 2 November 2021. Retrieved 8 November 2021.
90. Welsby, Dan; Price, James; Pye, Steve; Ekins, Paul (September 2021). "Unextractable fossil fuels in a 1.5 °C world". Nature. 597 (7875): 230–234. Bibcode:2021Natur.597..230W. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03821-8. ISSN 1476-4687. PMID 34497394. S2CID 237455006.
91. Muttitt, Greg; Kartha, Sivan (13 September 2020). "Equity, climate justice and fossil fuel extraction: principles for a managed phase out". Climate Policy. 20 (8): 1024–1042. Bibcode:2020CliPo..20.1024M. doi:10.1080/14693062.2020.1763900. ISSN 1469-3062. S2CID 219681770.
92. "World Energy Investment 2023" (PDF). IEA.org. International Energy Agency. May 2023. p. 61. (PDF) from the original on 7 August 2023.
93. Okamoto, Sanae; Sluismans, Raf. "COP26: The psychological game behind a successful negotiation". phys.org. from the original on 8 November 2021. Retrieved 8 November 2021.
94. Bousso, Ron (8 February 2023). "Big Oil doubles profits in blockbuster 2022". Reuters. from the original on 31 March 2023. ● Details for 2020 from the more detailed diagram in King, Ben (12 February 2023). "Why are BP, Shell, and other oil giants making so much money right now?". BBC. from the original on 22 April 2023.
95. Tørstad, Vegard; Sælen, Håkon (28 May 2018). "Fairness in the climate negotiations: what explains variation in parties' expressed conceptions?". Climate Policy. 18 (5): 642–654. Bibcode:2018CliPo..18..642T. doi:10.1080/14693062.2017.1341372. hdl:1814/48265. ISSN 1469-3062. S2CID 158916051.
96. Ertürk, Korkut Alp; Whittle, Jason (2015). "Climate Change, Procrastination and Asymmetric Power" (PDF). World Economic Review. 2015 (5): 1–40. (PDF) from the original on 5 November 2021. Retrieved 8 November 2021.
97. World People's Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth April 22nd, Cochabamba, Bolivia - People's Agreement (Report). World People's Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth. 22 April 2010. from the original on 19 December 2019. Retrieved 20 December 2019.
98. "Climate Change Indicators: U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions / Figure 3. U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions per Capita and per Dollar of GDP, 1990–2020". EPA.gov. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 27 June 2016. from the original on 5 April 2023.
99. Bolin, Bert (2007). A history of the science and politics of climate change : the role of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Bert Bolin. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. p. 69. ISBN 978-0-521-08873-2. OCLC 1058098098.
100. Agarwal, Anil; Narain, Sunita (21 November 2019). Global Warming in an Unequal World: A Case of Environmental Colonialism. Oxford University Press. pp. 81–91. doi:10.1093/oso/9780199498734.003.0005. ISBN 978-0-19-949873-4. from the original on 9 March 2022. Retrieved 9 March 2022. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help)
101. "UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE" (PDF). 1992. (PDF) from the original on 7 May 2022. Retrieved 9 March 2022.
102. Cripps, Elizabeth (2022). What climate justice means and why we should care. London. ISBN 978-1-4729-9183-6. OCLC 1295438411.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
103. Moellendorf, Darrel (2022). Mobilizing hope : climate change and global poverty. New York, NY. ISBN 978-0-19-087561-9. OCLC 1285485609.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
104. . CorpWatch. 19 November 2000. Archived from the original on 19 April 2016.
105. . worldsummit2002.org. Heinrich Böll Foundation. Archived from the original on 30 September 2002.
106. Bali Principles of Climate Justice (PDF). EJNet.org (Report). 29 August 2002. (PDF) from the original on 1 April 2016. Retrieved 20 December 2019.
107. "Durban Group for Climate Justice". Transnational Institute. 6 July 2009. from the original on 18 April 2016. Retrieved 6 April 2016.
108. "The Global Humanitarian Forum Annual Meeting 2008". from the original on 15 January 2010. Retrieved 28 June 2017.
109. . Heinrich Böll Foundation. Archived from the original on 21 December 2018.
110. . Indymedia. 13 December 2009. Archived from the original on 1 December 2018.
111. "Mary Robinson Foundation – Climate Justice | Climate Justice Dialogue". www.mrfcj.org. from the original on 17 February 2022. Retrieved 18 March 2022.
112. "The People's Demands for Climate Justice". The People's Demands for Climate Justice. from the original on 8 December 2018. Retrieved 8 December 2018.
113. Harvey, Fiona (22 June 2023). "World Bank offers developing countries debt pauses if hit by climate crisis". The Guardian. Retrieved 28 June 2023.
114. Anderson, Stefan (26 June 2023). "Paris Climate Finance Summit Unlocks Funding, Dodges Debt". Health policy watch. Retrieved 28 June 2023.
115. Harvey, Fiona (19 June 2023). "A wealth tax could help poorer countries tackle climate crisis, economists say". The Guardian. Retrieved 28 June 2023.
116. Baethgen WE (1997). "Vulnerability of the agricultural sector of Latin America to climate change" (PDF). Climate Research. 9: 1–7. Bibcode:1997ClRes...9....1B. doi:10.3354/cr009001. (PDF) from the original on 11 May 2022. Retrieved 11 March 2022.
117. Morton JF (December 2007). "The impact of climate change on smallholder and subsistence agriculture". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 104 (50): 19680–5. doi:10.1073/pnas.0701855104. PMC 2148357. PMID 18077400.
118. Jones P, Thornton P (April 2003). "The potential impacts of climate change on maize production in Africa and Latin America in 2055". Global Environmental Change. 13 (1): 51–59. doi:10.1016/S0959-3780(02)00090-0.
119. Timmons Roberts, J. (December 2009). "The International Dimension of Climate Justice and the Need for International Adaptation Funding". Environmental Justice. 2 (4): 185–190. doi:10.1089/env.2009.0029.
120. Masters, Jeff (23 December 2019). "Fifth Straight Year of Central American Drought Helping Drive Migration". Scientific American. from the original on 7 June 2021. Retrieved 1 June 2021.
121. Davies M, Guenther B, Leavy J, Mitchell T, Tanner T (February 2009). "Climate Change Adaptation, Disaster Risk Reduction and Social Protection: Complementary Roles in Agriculture and Rural Growth?". IDS Working Papers. 2009 (320): 01–37. doi:10.1111/j.2040-0209.2009.00320_2.x. from the original on 30 May 2022. Retrieved 11 March 2022.
122. Green, Lisa; Schmook, Birgit; Radel, Claudia; Mardero, Sofia (March 2020). "Living Smallholder Vulnerability: The Everyday Experience of Climate Change in Calakmul, Mexico". Journal of Latin American Geography. 19 (2). University of Texas Press: 110–142. doi:10.1353/lag.2020.0028. S2CID 216383920. from the original on 18 June 2022. Retrieved 11 March 2022.
123. Adger, Neil; Jouni Paavola; Saleemul Huq; et al., eds. (2006). Fairness in adaptation to climate change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-01227-0.
124. Walsh, K. J. E.; Camargo, S. J.; Knutson, T. R.; Kossin, J.; Lee, T. -C.; Murakami, H.; Patricola, C. (1 December 2019). "Tropical cyclones and climate change". Tropical Cyclone Research and Review. 8 (4): 240–250. Bibcode:2019TCRR....8..240W. doi:10.1016/j.tcrr.2020.01.004. hdl:11343/192963. ISSN 2225-6032.
125. Christian-Smith, Juliet; Peter H. Gleick; Heather Cooley; et al. (2012). A twenty-first century US water policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199859443.
126. Giroux, Henry A. (2006). "Reading Hurricane Katrina: Race, Class, and the Biopolitics of Disposability". College Literature. 33 (3): 171–196. doi:10.1353/lit.2006.0037. S2CID 144188079.
127. Elliott, James R.; Pais, Jeremy (2006). "Race, class, and Hurricane Katrina: Social differences in human responses to disaster". Social Science Research. 35 (2): 295–321. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2006.02.003.
128. Masozera, Michel (2007). "Distribution of impacts of natural disasters across income groups: A case study of New Orleans". Ecological Economics. 63 (2–3): 299–306. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.06.013.
129. Mohai, Paul; Pellow, David; Roberts, J. Timmons (2009). "Environmental Justice". Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 34 (1): 405–430. doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-082508-094348.

Further reading

• Dolšak, Nives; Prakash, Aseem (2022). "Three Faces of Climate Justice". Annual Review of Political Science. 25 (1): 283–301.
• Homeberg, Marc van den; McQuistan, Colin (2018). "Technology for Climate Justice: A Reporting Framework for Loss and Damage as Part of Key Global Agreements". Loss and Damage from Climate Change. 513-545.
• Department of Economics and Social Affairs, UN (2017). "[1]". Climate Change and Social Inequality.

External links

 

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Climate justice.

• In-depth Q&A: What is 'climate justice'? Carbon Brief, 2021.