Impacts of neoliberal wind energy investments on environmental justice and human rights in Mexico

2019 ◽  
pp. 353-377
Author(s):  
Jacobo Ramirez
Focaal ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (85) ◽  
pp. 37-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lindsay Ofrias ◽  
Gordon Roecker

This article examines how the world’s arguably largest oil disaster, in the heart of Ecuador’s Amazon rainforest, has become a testing ground for new global forms of corporate power and the criminalization of dissent. Following the ongoing “trial of the century” between Chevron Corporation and plaintiffs representing tens of thousands of smallholder farmers and indigenous people affected by the disaster, we look at how the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act has been applied against the affected people and their lawyers to sidestep the norm of international comity and alter the parameters for pursuing environmental justice. Specifically, we point to how the case—and a new crop of cases following suit—has threatened to criminalize the use of “lawfare” as a “weapon of the weak.”


2006 ◽  
Vol 19 (02) ◽  
pp. 255-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Caney

The paper has the following structure. In Section I, I introduce some important methodological preliminaries by asking: How should one reason about global environmental justice in general and global climate change in particular? Section II introduces the key normative argument; it argues that global climate change damages some fundamental human interests and results in a state of affairs in which the rights of many are unprotected: as such it is unjust. Section III addresses the complexities that arise from the fact that some of the ill effects of global climate change will fall on the members of future generations. Section IV shows that some prevailing approaches are unable to deal satisfactorily with the challenges posed by global climate change. If the argument of this paper is correct, it follows that those who contribute to global climate change through high emissions are guilty of human rights violations and they should be condemned as such.


Author(s):  
Sarah Dávila-Ruhaak

The connection between the environment and human rights is not a surprising one. The enjoyment of human rights depends on a person’s ability to live free from interference and to have his or her rights protected. The interdependence of human rights and the protection of the environment is manifested in the full and effective enjoyment of the right to a healthy environment. This article argues that in order to protect vulnerable persons and communities facing environmental harm, a human rights framework—specifically the right to a healthy environment—must be applied. A human rights approach complements environmental justice work, recognizing that individuals and communities affected by environmental harm are rights-holders entitled to protection. Such communities are left out of important decisions about their environment and the effect of environmental harm in their lives. Individuals most vulnerable to environmental harm are often members of poor, rural, and disenfranchised communities. The destruction of the environment disproportionately affects these communities, preventing them from accessing basic natural resources, clean water and sanitation, adequate housing, food security, and access to health and medical assistance. Additionally, intersecting forms of discrimination exacerbate exclusion and marginalization. A human rights approach to environmental justice emphasizes the need to protect affected communities and holds the State responsible for recognizing their vulnerability and providing heightened protection. This article seeks to show that while the human right to a healthy environment has not been widely recognized, a robust juridical framework enables environmental justice advocates and affected communities to vindicate the rights of vulnerable communities. The case study of coal-ash contamination in Puerto Rico and the harms suffered by affected communities there anchors the argument for why advocates should use a human rights framework to protect the rights of the most vulnerable. The case of Puerto Rico is illustrative of so many poor, disenfranchised, and vulnerable communities around the world, affected by environmental harm and in need of a human rights-based framework.


Afrika Focus ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-35
Author(s):  
Gordon H. Pirie

Mobility practices, discourse and measurement need rethinking in an age of energy shortages, environmental anxiety and virtual mobility. Standard numerical indexes and other proxies for geographical mobility can be misleading, not least in formulating public policy. The extremes of spatial mobilities in Africa may require particularly sensitive consideration; the peculiar social, psychological and economic dimensions of geographical mobility on the continent certainly need registering. Yet the exceptionalism of the African case is overdrawn and the developmentalism inherent in yearnings for more mobility is a short-term exaggeration. Revaluing totemic mechanised mobility is urgently required. The way we act on, and the way we think, talk and write about, geographical mobility needs reconceptualising in terms of fairness, equity, environmental justice, and human rights.


Author(s):  
Mary E. Rogge

The concept of environmental justice gained currency in the public arena during the latter part of the 20th century. It embodies social work's person-in-environment perspective and dedication to people who are vulnerable, oppressed, and poor. The pursuit of environmental justice engages citizens in local to international struggles for economic resources, health, and well-being, and in struggles for political voice and the realization of civil and human rights.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document