The concept of environmental justice applies the theories of justice[1] to the field of environment and ecology.[2][3] It is derived from the consideration of the environment and ecosystem services as elements of the common good.
This concept refers to the equitable distribution of burdens and benefits in the use and exploitation of natural goods of common interest, such as water and air.[4]It implies that there are rights of access to nature for everyone: individuals, families, communities, companies and other human groups in relation to the environment considered as a common good, but in exchange for legal duties and obligations.[5] According to the philosopher Fabrice Flipo (2022), and based on the Human Development Report of the Program of United Nations for Development (UNDP),[6] «in the absence of third parties capable of administering justice, the strongest exceed their rights and evade their duties, gradually constituting private potentates. Therefore, as expected, current rules lead to a global increase in inequalities."[5].
These duties or obligations are often grouped into the notion of social and environmental responsibility, under the premise that the freedom to exploit the environment stops where it threatens others, therefore, it is mandatory not to overexploit a resource. Likewise, they are framed in the consideration that the environment (biodiversity, natural habitats, genetic diversity) would itself be threatened by human activities.
The concept of environmental justice also invites us to think about and implement reduction, repair and compensation measures when ecological damage cannot be avoided, which may sometimes require or justify a certain "ecological interference".[7].
Environmental justice can also be applied to the equitable distribution of the benefits of activities that cause climate change and the burdens of their impacts.[8]In such a context, we sometimes talk about injustice and/or climate justice.[9].
Generalities and history of the concept
The concept of social and environmental equity appears in the analysis of the tragedy of the commons applied in Third Worldism and in many critical analyzes of colonization and slavery, although it appeared strongly associated with the environment or ecology only around 1990-1992 with its international formalization at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro (1992) and in parallel forums led by non-governmental organizations and civil society.
Spatial justice theory
Introduction
The concept of environmental justice applies the theories of justice[1] to the field of environment and ecology.[2][3] It is derived from the consideration of the environment and ecosystem services as elements of the common good.
This concept refers to the equitable distribution of burdens and benefits in the use and exploitation of natural goods of common interest, such as water and air.[4]It implies that there are rights of access to nature for everyone: individuals, families, communities, companies and other human groups in relation to the environment considered as a common good, but in exchange for legal duties and obligations.[5] According to the philosopher Fabrice Flipo (2022), and based on the Human Development Report of the Program of United Nations for Development (UNDP),[6] «in the absence of third parties capable of administering justice, the strongest exceed their rights and evade their duties, gradually constituting private potentates. Therefore, as expected, current rules lead to a global increase in inequalities."[5].
These duties or obligations are often grouped into the notion of social and environmental responsibility, under the premise that the freedom to exploit the environment stops where it threatens others, therefore, it is mandatory not to overexploit a resource. Likewise, they are framed in the consideration that the environment (biodiversity, natural habitats, genetic diversity) would itself be threatened by human activities.
The concept of environmental justice also invites us to think about and implement reduction, repair and compensation measures when ecological damage cannot be avoided, which may sometimes require or justify a certain "ecological interference".[7].
Environmental justice can also be applied to the equitable distribution of the benefits of activities that cause climate change and the burdens of their impacts.[8]In such a context, we sometimes talk about injustice and/or climate justice.[9].
Generalities and history of the concept
The concept of social and environmental equity appears in the analysis of the tragedy of the commons applied in Third Worldism and in many critical analyzes of colonization and slavery, although it appeared strongly associated with the environment or ecology only around 1990-1992 with its international formalization at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro (1992) and in parallel forums led by non-governmental organizations and civil society.
These notions emerged from the 1970s to the 1990s, as the external debt of developing countries continued to grow, in parallel with the construction of environmental law at local, regional and global scales. This contributed to the gradual formation of an awareness about the vulnerability of the natural heritage and about the existence of an ecological debt[10] on the part of the so-called "global north" towards the "global south", referring to the imbalance in the use of natural resources and the pollution produced.[11] This debt is not monetary, however, it is aggravated by the financial debt maintained by the global south.
In the United States, the concept "environmental justice" began to be used in the early 1980s, often related to the civil rights movement and with the support of some churches. It arose from the observation that polluting factories, storage and treatment of hazardous waste discharges more often and more directly affected the populations where the poorest and most vulnerable people resided,[12] mainly Amerindians and African Americans.[13]To refer to this issue, researcher Benjamin Chavis coined the term "environmental racism" in 1987 in a report titled "Toxic Waste and Race in the United States." United".[14][15].
In 1994, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) "Environmental Protection Agency (United States)") was charged with the official mission of detecting and, if possible, reducing "environmental injustices" covering racial and social discrimination.
In the early 2000s, this concept was still little discussed in academic literature and sparsely presented in public policy.[3] According to J Theys, in the early 2000s, ecological inequalities remained a "forgotten dimension of public action"[16] and social and environmental concerns are ignored by others.[17].
Although the central content of the concept of environmental justice is related to distributive justice, there are other aspects that escape the latter and have been incorporated into the debate. Some authors maintain, for example, that the disproportion in environmental burdens is really an effect and not a cause of environmental injustice, and that this is expressed mainly in the lack of opportunities, political participation and recognition on the part of those who suffer.[18].
Thus, the EPA defines environmental justice as the fair treatment and meaningful participation of all people regardless of their race, color, national origin, culture, education or income with respect to the development and application of environmental laws, regulations or policies.[19].
Justice can allow certain "positive" inequalities, thus justifying in international negotiations, greater efforts on the part of the richest countries, while giving additional time to poor countries, which, in fact, pollute largely due to the services and products they offer to rich countries.[2].
Double dimension, geospatial and temporal
Environmental justice refers to both equality of opportunity in terms of sustainable access to vital natural resources between the rich and poor regions of the world, as well as a more "fair" exchange and equitable weight of ecological debt and its amortization at the territorial, geographical and biogeographical level.[20][21].
These meanings correspond to the spatial or geospatial dimension of environmental justice. This dimension is not necessarily based on geographic borders, but rather a new "ecological space",[22] which would be the biosphere and some of its biogeographic subsets, where environmental inequalities are often also territorial inequalities.[3] This spatial dimension includes landscapes that are increasingly apprehended according to the principles of landscape ecology, such as agricultural and industrial regions, which are seen as subjects of environmental justice.[23].
The spatial dimension also considers the "north-south" gaps,[24]which refers to the imbalances between the so-called "global north" and "global south" in terms of responsibilities for climate change, considering the unequal consumption of resources, the emission of greenhouse gases and the generation of waste,[11]with developed nations being the ones that have contributed the most to the climate crisis.[25]Likewise, it emphasizes the inequality of wealth and technologies, which influence the ability to adaptation to climate change in different territories.
On the other hand, the concept of environmental justice also tends to acquire a strong temporal dimension, as part of the progressive adoption of the principles of sustainable development and intra- and intergenerational equity.[26] The latter refers to the moral responsibilities shared between different generations,[27]current and future, which leads to talk of environmental justice for future generations.[22]In the brochure Save the Children (2021) it is recommended that the voice of the next generation be heard more in the defense of their rights. environmental, which are being violated.[28].
Fields and subject areas
Among the main problems addressed by environmental justice are:.
Limitations
Polysemy
The concept of environmental justice is still young and polysemic. From the years 1990 to 2010, many actors have claimed environmental justice, but they do not always use the same term and there are variations in its meaning. This polysemy is explained in particular by the fact that cultural representations about nature are still very varied.[36].
Likewise, "just" environmental policies would imply "the identification and mapping of injustices, the articulation of the different scales and actors involved, and the definition of spaces of concern." To be operational, this form of justice must be based on a still incomplete body of law and be defined or redefined for each spatial and temporal scale, understanding that different injustices exist in territories whose environments differ. The notion of ecological inequality is understood differently depending on the actors.[36].
Barriers to access to environmental justice
Another limitation corresponds to access to justice in environmental matters, understood as the possibility that every person has to access the jurisdictional and administrative bodies to assert their rights and have them effectively guaranteed by the State.[37] Under this meaning, the limitations refer to where and when it begins to be present in national legislation.[38] For example, indigenous, poor or isolated communities are often poorly represented in the courts or do not know their rights. rights.[39].
Furthermore, to be brought before a court or other administrative body, ecological or environmental damage generally must be characterized quite precisely, which sometimes becomes difficult when due to indirect or synergistic effects, or may be hampered due to taxonomic impediments or the lack of human and financial resources dedicated to inventorying biodiversity, and protecting species and habitats, especially in some poor or isolated areas.
Faced with this legal problem, some authors such as Paulo César Delgado Neyra maintain that environmental damage must be analyzed under the principle of "harm prevention" and the precautionary principle, with which the certainty of environmental damage is diluted or relativized, giving rise to plausibility. In the same sense, the causality of damage must be approached from the possibility instead of accuracy, thus making a retrospective judgment of suitability or simple probability.[40].
Intergenerational Justice
Another limitation is related to the difficulties in applying intergenerational justice, given that future generations do not have direct representatives by definition. This means that they are sometimes poorly defended from the damage they will have to endure due to "unsustainable" human activities of the past and present.
References
[1] ↑ Rawls, John (1971), A theory of justice, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press.
[5] ↑ a b Flipo, Fabrice (2002). L'espace écologique - Sur les relations de l'écopolitique internationale à la philosophie politique classique (en francés).: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00957845/
[6] ↑ PNUD (1999). Informe sobre el Desarrollo Humano.
[7] ↑ Rossi G. (2003), L'ingérence écologique, París, CNRS Éditions, 248 p.
[8] ↑ M. Munasinghe & R. Swart (Eds.) (2000) Climate Change and Its Linkages with Development, Equity, and Sustainability.
[9] ↑ Pettit, J. (2004). Climate justice : a new social movements for atmospheric rights, IDS Bulletin, julio de 2004, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 120-106.
[10] ↑ Paredis E., Lambrecht J. et al. (2004), Elaboration of the concept of ecological debt, Informe final, septiembre de 2004, Centre for Sustainable Development (CDO) – Ghent University.
[12] ↑ Walker G., Fairburn J., Smith G., Mitchell G. (2003), Environmental Quality and Social Deprivation Phase II : National Analysis of Flood Hazard, IPC Industries and Air Quality, R&D Project.
[13] ↑ Ghorra-Gobin C (2005) «Justice environnementale et intérêt général aux États-Unis», Annales de la recherche urbaine, n◦ 99, p. 49-59.
[14] ↑ Chavis, Benjamin (1987). United Church of Christ. Commission for Racial Justice, ed. Toxic Wastes and Race in the United States: A National Report on the Racial and Socio-economic Characteristics of Communities with Hazardous Waste Sites. Consultado el 9 de septiembre de 2018.: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1310/ML13109A339.pdf
[16] ↑ Theys J. (2005), Les inégalités écologiques, dimension oubliée de l’action publique : entre raisons politiques et explications épistémologiques, Institut d’Urbanisme de París. « Inégalités sociales et environnementales », 11 p.
[17] ↑ Theys J. (2007), «Pourquoi les préoccupations sociales et environnementales s’ignorent-elles mutuellement?», en P. Cornut et al, Environnement et inégalités sociales, Bruselas, Éditions de l’université de Bruxelles, pp. 23-35.
[18] ↑ Hervé Espejo, Dominique (2010-07). «NOCIÓN Y ELEMENTOS DE LA JUSTICIA AMBIENTAL: DIRECTRICES PARA SU APLICACIÓN EN LA PLANIFICACIÓN TERRITORIAL Y EN LA EVALUACIÓN AMBIENTAL ESTRATÉGICA». Revista de derecho (Valdivia) 23 (1): 9-36. ISSN 0718-0950. doi:10.4067/S0718-09502010000100001. Consultado el 18 de agosto de 2024.: https://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0718-09502010000100001
[20] ↑ Harvey D. (1996), Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference, Oxford, Blackwell Publishing, 468 p.
[21] ↑ Walker G., Bulkeley H. (2006), «Geographies of environmental justice», Geoforum, 37, pp. 655-659.
[22] ↑ a b Flipo, Fabrice (2002). L’espace écologique - Fondements d’une théorie politique de la dimension naturelle de la liberté, Les Cahiers du Proses, Sciences Po, París, junio/julio de 2002.
[23] ↑ Fortín Marie-José (2005) Paysage industriel, lieu de médiation sociale et enjeu de développement durable et de justice environnementale: les cas des complexes d'Alcan (Alma, Quebec) et de Péchiney-Dunkerque, France) (Tesis doctoral, París 1).
[24] ↑ Anand R (2004): "International environmental justice: a North-South dimensión.“ Ashgate, Hampshire (Reino Unido).
[26] ↑ Okereke C. (2006) «Global environmental sustainability : intragenerational equity and conceptions of justice in multilateral environmental regimes», Geoforum, 37 (2006), p. 725-738.
[29] ↑ Schlosberg D. (2003), «The Justice of Environmental Justice : Reconciling Equity, Recognition and Participation in a Political Movement », in A. Light et A. de-Shalit (ed.), Moral and Political Reasoning in Environmental Practice, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
[30] ↑ Dobson, A. (1998). Justice and the environment. Conceptions of environmental sustainability and dimensions of social justice, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford.
[31] ↑ Sachs I. (1980), L’écodéveloppement : stratégie pour le 21e siècle, París: Syros.
[32] ↑ Chaumel, M., Branche, S. L. (2008) Inégalités écologiques : vers quelle définition?. Space populations societies, (2008/1), pp. 101-110.
[33] ↑ Mathevet, R., Thompson, J., Delanoë, O., Cheylan, M., Gil-Fourrier, C., Bonnin, M., & Mathevet, R. (2010) La solidarité écologique: un nouveau concept pour une gestion intégrée des parcs nationaux et des territoires. Natures Sciences Sociétés, 18(4), pp. 424-433.
[34] ↑ Theys J. (2000), Quand inégalités sociales et inégalités écologiques se cumulent. L’exemple du SELA, Note du CPVS, n◦ 13, MELT-DRAST.
[35] ↑ Vallejo, Romina Caminada (28 de noviembre de 2015). «El derecho ambiental desde una perspectiva de derechos humanos y de eficaz gestión gubernamental». Vox Juris 24 (2): 17-36. ISSN 2521-5280. Consultado el 19 de octubre de 2022.: https://www.aulavirtualusmp.pe/ojs/index.php/VJ/article/view/2
[36] ↑ a b Laigle L. (2007), «Des conceptions différentes des inégalités écologiques et de l’action publique au cœur des politiques de développement urbain durable en Europe ? », en Ministère de l’Écologie et du Développement durable (MEDD): Programme de recherche politiques territoriales et développement durable, seminario del 16 de enero de 2007.
[38] ↑ Newel P. (2001), «Access to environmental Justice? litigation against TNCs in the South», IDS Bulletin, enero de 2001, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 83-93.
[39] ↑ Roussel, B. (2005), «Savoirs locaux et conservation de la biodiversité : renforcer la représentation des communautés », Mouvements, n◦ 41, septiembre/octubre de 2005, pp. 82-88.
[40] ↑ Delgado Neyra, Paulo César (2020). El daño ambiental en el Perú. Motivensa Editora Jurídica. p. 216. ISBN 978-612-4144-32-5.
These notions emerged from the 1970s to the 1990s, as the external debt of developing countries continued to grow, in parallel with the construction of environmental law at local, regional and global scales. This contributed to the gradual formation of an awareness about the vulnerability of the natural heritage and about the existence of an ecological debt[10] on the part of the so-called "global north" towards the "global south", referring to the imbalance in the use of natural resources and the pollution produced.[11] This debt is not monetary, however, it is aggravated by the financial debt maintained by the global south.
In the United States, the concept "environmental justice" began to be used in the early 1980s, often related to the civil rights movement and with the support of some churches. It arose from the observation that polluting factories, storage and treatment of hazardous waste discharges more often and more directly affected the populations where the poorest and most vulnerable people resided,[12] mainly Amerindians and African Americans.[13]To refer to this issue, researcher Benjamin Chavis coined the term "environmental racism" in 1987 in a report titled "Toxic Waste and Race in the United States." United".[14][15].
In 1994, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) "Environmental Protection Agency (United States)") was charged with the official mission of detecting and, if possible, reducing "environmental injustices" covering racial and social discrimination.
In the early 2000s, this concept was still little discussed in academic literature and sparsely presented in public policy.[3] According to J Theys, in the early 2000s, ecological inequalities remained a "forgotten dimension of public action"[16] and social and environmental concerns are ignored by others.[17].
Although the central content of the concept of environmental justice is related to distributive justice, there are other aspects that escape the latter and have been incorporated into the debate. Some authors maintain, for example, that the disproportion in environmental burdens is really an effect and not a cause of environmental injustice, and that this is expressed mainly in the lack of opportunities, political participation and recognition on the part of those who suffer.[18].
Thus, the EPA defines environmental justice as the fair treatment and meaningful participation of all people regardless of their race, color, national origin, culture, education or income with respect to the development and application of environmental laws, regulations or policies.[19].
Justice can allow certain "positive" inequalities, thus justifying in international negotiations, greater efforts on the part of the richest countries, while giving additional time to poor countries, which, in fact, pollute largely due to the services and products they offer to rich countries.[2].
Double dimension, geospatial and temporal
Environmental justice refers to both equality of opportunity in terms of sustainable access to vital natural resources between the rich and poor regions of the world, as well as a more "fair" exchange and equitable weight of ecological debt and its amortization at the territorial, geographical and biogeographical level.[20][21].
These meanings correspond to the spatial or geospatial dimension of environmental justice. This dimension is not necessarily based on geographic borders, but rather a new "ecological space",[22] which would be the biosphere and some of its biogeographic subsets, where environmental inequalities are often also territorial inequalities.[3] This spatial dimension includes landscapes that are increasingly apprehended according to the principles of landscape ecology, such as agricultural and industrial regions, which are seen as subjects of environmental justice.[23].
The spatial dimension also considers the "north-south" gaps,[24]which refers to the imbalances between the so-called "global north" and "global south" in terms of responsibilities for climate change, considering the unequal consumption of resources, the emission of greenhouse gases and the generation of waste,[11]with developed nations being the ones that have contributed the most to the climate crisis.[25]Likewise, it emphasizes the inequality of wealth and technologies, which influence the ability to adaptation to climate change in different territories.
On the other hand, the concept of environmental justice also tends to acquire a strong temporal dimension, as part of the progressive adoption of the principles of sustainable development and intra- and intergenerational equity.[26] The latter refers to the moral responsibilities shared between different generations,[27]current and future, which leads to talk of environmental justice for future generations.[22]In the brochure Save the Children (2021) it is recommended that the voice of the next generation be heard more in the defense of their rights. environmental, which are being violated.[28].
Fields and subject areas
Among the main problems addressed by environmental justice are:.
Limitations
Polysemy
The concept of environmental justice is still young and polysemic. From the years 1990 to 2010, many actors have claimed environmental justice, but they do not always use the same term and there are variations in its meaning. This polysemy is explained in particular by the fact that cultural representations about nature are still very varied.[36].
Likewise, "just" environmental policies would imply "the identification and mapping of injustices, the articulation of the different scales and actors involved, and the definition of spaces of concern." To be operational, this form of justice must be based on a still incomplete body of law and be defined or redefined for each spatial and temporal scale, understanding that different injustices exist in territories whose environments differ. The notion of ecological inequality is understood differently depending on the actors.[36].
Barriers to access to environmental justice
Another limitation corresponds to access to justice in environmental matters, understood as the possibility that every person has to access the jurisdictional and administrative bodies to assert their rights and have them effectively guaranteed by the State.[37] Under this meaning, the limitations refer to where and when it begins to be present in national legislation.[38] For example, indigenous, poor or isolated communities are often poorly represented in the courts or do not know their rights. rights.[39].
Furthermore, to be brought before a court or other administrative body, ecological or environmental damage generally must be characterized quite precisely, which sometimes becomes difficult when due to indirect or synergistic effects, or may be hampered due to taxonomic impediments or the lack of human and financial resources dedicated to inventorying biodiversity, and protecting species and habitats, especially in some poor or isolated areas.
Faced with this legal problem, some authors such as Paulo César Delgado Neyra maintain that environmental damage must be analyzed under the principle of "harm prevention" and the precautionary principle, with which the certainty of environmental damage is diluted or relativized, giving rise to plausibility. In the same sense, the causality of damage must be approached from the possibility instead of accuracy, thus making a retrospective judgment of suitability or simple probability.[40].
Intergenerational Justice
Another limitation is related to the difficulties in applying intergenerational justice, given that future generations do not have direct representatives by definition. This means that they are sometimes poorly defended from the damage they will have to endure due to "unsustainable" human activities of the past and present.
References
[1] ↑ Rawls, John (1971), A theory of justice, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press.
[5] ↑ a b Flipo, Fabrice (2002). L'espace écologique - Sur les relations de l'écopolitique internationale à la philosophie politique classique (en francés).: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00957845/
[6] ↑ PNUD (1999). Informe sobre el Desarrollo Humano.
[7] ↑ Rossi G. (2003), L'ingérence écologique, París, CNRS Éditions, 248 p.
[8] ↑ M. Munasinghe & R. Swart (Eds.) (2000) Climate Change and Its Linkages with Development, Equity, and Sustainability.
[9] ↑ Pettit, J. (2004). Climate justice : a new social movements for atmospheric rights, IDS Bulletin, julio de 2004, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 120-106.
[10] ↑ Paredis E., Lambrecht J. et al. (2004), Elaboration of the concept of ecological debt, Informe final, septiembre de 2004, Centre for Sustainable Development (CDO) – Ghent University.
[12] ↑ Walker G., Fairburn J., Smith G., Mitchell G. (2003), Environmental Quality and Social Deprivation Phase II : National Analysis of Flood Hazard, IPC Industries and Air Quality, R&D Project.
[13] ↑ Ghorra-Gobin C (2005) «Justice environnementale et intérêt général aux États-Unis», Annales de la recherche urbaine, n◦ 99, p. 49-59.
[14] ↑ Chavis, Benjamin (1987). United Church of Christ. Commission for Racial Justice, ed. Toxic Wastes and Race in the United States: A National Report on the Racial and Socio-economic Characteristics of Communities with Hazardous Waste Sites. Consultado el 9 de septiembre de 2018.: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1310/ML13109A339.pdf
[16] ↑ Theys J. (2005), Les inégalités écologiques, dimension oubliée de l’action publique : entre raisons politiques et explications épistémologiques, Institut d’Urbanisme de París. « Inégalités sociales et environnementales », 11 p.
[17] ↑ Theys J. (2007), «Pourquoi les préoccupations sociales et environnementales s’ignorent-elles mutuellement?», en P. Cornut et al, Environnement et inégalités sociales, Bruselas, Éditions de l’université de Bruxelles, pp. 23-35.
[18] ↑ Hervé Espejo, Dominique (2010-07). «NOCIÓN Y ELEMENTOS DE LA JUSTICIA AMBIENTAL: DIRECTRICES PARA SU APLICACIÓN EN LA PLANIFICACIÓN TERRITORIAL Y EN LA EVALUACIÓN AMBIENTAL ESTRATÉGICA». Revista de derecho (Valdivia) 23 (1): 9-36. ISSN 0718-0950. doi:10.4067/S0718-09502010000100001. Consultado el 18 de agosto de 2024.: https://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0718-09502010000100001
[20] ↑ Harvey D. (1996), Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference, Oxford, Blackwell Publishing, 468 p.
[21] ↑ Walker G., Bulkeley H. (2006), «Geographies of environmental justice», Geoforum, 37, pp. 655-659.
[22] ↑ a b Flipo, Fabrice (2002). L’espace écologique - Fondements d’une théorie politique de la dimension naturelle de la liberté, Les Cahiers du Proses, Sciences Po, París, junio/julio de 2002.
[23] ↑ Fortín Marie-José (2005) Paysage industriel, lieu de médiation sociale et enjeu de développement durable et de justice environnementale: les cas des complexes d'Alcan (Alma, Quebec) et de Péchiney-Dunkerque, France) (Tesis doctoral, París 1).
[24] ↑ Anand R (2004): "International environmental justice: a North-South dimensión.“ Ashgate, Hampshire (Reino Unido).
[26] ↑ Okereke C. (2006) «Global environmental sustainability : intragenerational equity and conceptions of justice in multilateral environmental regimes», Geoforum, 37 (2006), p. 725-738.
[29] ↑ Schlosberg D. (2003), «The Justice of Environmental Justice : Reconciling Equity, Recognition and Participation in a Political Movement », in A. Light et A. de-Shalit (ed.), Moral and Political Reasoning in Environmental Practice, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
[30] ↑ Dobson, A. (1998). Justice and the environment. Conceptions of environmental sustainability and dimensions of social justice, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford.
[31] ↑ Sachs I. (1980), L’écodéveloppement : stratégie pour le 21e siècle, París: Syros.
[32] ↑ Chaumel, M., Branche, S. L. (2008) Inégalités écologiques : vers quelle définition?. Space populations societies, (2008/1), pp. 101-110.
[33] ↑ Mathevet, R., Thompson, J., Delanoë, O., Cheylan, M., Gil-Fourrier, C., Bonnin, M., & Mathevet, R. (2010) La solidarité écologique: un nouveau concept pour une gestion intégrée des parcs nationaux et des territoires. Natures Sciences Sociétés, 18(4), pp. 424-433.
[34] ↑ Theys J. (2000), Quand inégalités sociales et inégalités écologiques se cumulent. L’exemple du SELA, Note du CPVS, n◦ 13, MELT-DRAST.
[35] ↑ Vallejo, Romina Caminada (28 de noviembre de 2015). «El derecho ambiental desde una perspectiva de derechos humanos y de eficaz gestión gubernamental». Vox Juris 24 (2): 17-36. ISSN 2521-5280. Consultado el 19 de octubre de 2022.: https://www.aulavirtualusmp.pe/ojs/index.php/VJ/article/view/2
[36] ↑ a b Laigle L. (2007), «Des conceptions différentes des inégalités écologiques et de l’action publique au cœur des politiques de développement urbain durable en Europe ? », en Ministère de l’Écologie et du Développement durable (MEDD): Programme de recherche politiques territoriales et développement durable, seminario del 16 de enero de 2007.
[38] ↑ Newel P. (2001), «Access to environmental Justice? litigation against TNCs in the South», IDS Bulletin, enero de 2001, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 83-93.
[39] ↑ Roussel, B. (2005), «Savoirs locaux et conservation de la biodiversité : renforcer la représentation des communautés », Mouvements, n◦ 41, septiembre/octubre de 2005, pp. 82-88.
[40] ↑ Delgado Neyra, Paulo César (2020). El daño ambiental en el Perú. Motivensa Editora Jurídica. p. 216. ISBN 978-612-4144-32-5.