Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Environmental justice and care: critical emancipatory contributions to sustainability discourse

  • Published:
Agriculture and Human Values Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Sustainability has become a powerful discourse, guiding the efforts of various stakeholders to find strategies for dealing with current and future social-ecological crises. To overcome the latter, we argue that sustainability discourse needs to be based on a critical-emancipatory conceptualization. Therefore, we engage two such approaches—environmental justice approaches informed by a plural understanding of justice and feminist political economy ones focusing on care—and their analytical potential for productive critique of normative assumptions in the dominant sustainability discourse. Both of these approaches highlight aspects of sustainability that are particularly relevant today. First, although sustainable development was conceptualized from the outset based upon a twofold notion of justice (intra- and intergenerational), the integration of justice in the dominant sustainability discourse and praxis often manifests merely as a normative aspiration. Meanwhile, the environmental justice and care approaches offer conceptualizations of justice that can act as a powerful lever and as transformation-strategy. Second, the dominant sustainability discourse largely remains within a neoliberal economic framework that continues to promote economic growth as the means to reach prosperity while neglecting the bases of every economy: care work and nature. Its focus lies solely on paid work and the market economy. By integrating (a) social and ecological ‘reproductivity’ (unpaid care and subsistence work as well as nature) and (b) democratic processes for just distribution of environmental burdens and benefits, as well as participatory equity in relevant decision making, feminist political economy and environmental justice approaches offer substantial strategies towards building humane, just and caring societies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This is the title of the main policy document of the UN Rio+20 conference (General Assembly 2012).

  2. We use the terms “Global South/North” to refer to historically produced areas in today still inequitable relations of power, resource flows, and (access to/recognition in) knowledge production.

  3. The term care describes tasks that are essential not only for individuals but also for the functioning of society, such as providing childcare, support for the elderly and sick (both paid and unpaid), and social engagement, in institutions and in private relationships. At times, care is used synonymously with the term reproduction or reproductive labor. In a broad understanding of care (Tronto 1993: 103), as used here, the term also includes care (work) for future generations, as well as for nature, animals and plants.

  4. This term recognizes the environmental-justice analysis that inequitable human–human relations are in fact greatly affecting human-nature relations.

  5. The second paragraph of the Johannesburg Declaration, adopted at the World Summit for Sustainable Development 2002, states: “We commit ourselves to building a humane, equitable, and caring global society, cognizant of the need for human dignity for all” (United Nations 2002).

  6. The term „praxis” refers to the inevitable interconnectedness between theory and practice, it therefore implies that academic work is always also political.

  7. In the context of such struggles, indigeneity is a strategic, not ‘essentialized’, identity used to gain recognition and participation rights in decision-making processes (at the UN, nation state, or regional levels) that affect the cultural survival of many peoples.

  8. In terms of climate justice, for example, industrialized nations have incurred an enormous CO2 debt during their “development” that is responsible for climate change today, while less industrialized nations have not, or have just recently begun adding to the problem. How can this debt be “repaid” to those nations less responsible, who need modes of sustainable development to grant a decent standard of living to their citizens?

  9. Since the middle of the 1980 s, the DAWN network, which today covers Africa, Asia, Latin America, the Caribbean and the Pacific, has been one of the strongest voices in the discourse on gender and (sustainable) development. It has influenced the discourse by offering holistic analyses and advancing alternatives from a Global South feminist perspective that is both grounded in women's experience and inspired by women's collective strategies and visions (DAWN 2015).

  10. The Vorsorgendes Wirtschaften network has grown in the context of the German-speaking sustainability discourse. The work on this approach started in 1992, when feminists posed the question of what “sustainable economy from a female perspective” would look like and, thus, initiated a process that continues to this day, namely to identify the prerequisites for a caring economy (Jochimsen and Knobloch 2000: 15).

  11. The contested idea of degrowth is advocated by the degrowth movement, which has shown that economic growth could be considered rather a threat than a condition for intragenerational and intergenerational justice, eroding the natural and social bases for a high quality of life for all. Therefore degrowth advocates call for the downscaling of production and consumption, following the argument that overconsumption lies at the root of long-term environmental issues and social inequalities. For a representative of the degrowth view, see Muraca (2012).

  12. We note that such a notion of the human family is also evident in almost all other UN documents concerning sustainability too, including the Rio +20 Declaration (General Assembly 2012).

Abbreviations

DAWN:

Development Alternatives for Women for a New Era

CSA:

Community supported agriculture

UNCED:

United Nations Conference on Environment and Development

WCED:

World Commission on Environment and Development

UN Rio+20:

United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development

UCCCRJ:

United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice

References

  • Adams, B., and G. Luchsinger. 2015. The 2015 declaration: Meeting great expectations (maybe). http://www.globalpolicywatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/GPW2-2015_03_03.pdf. Accessed 15 January 2015.

  • Agarwal, B. 1992. The gender and environment debate: Lessons from India. Feminist Studies 18(1): 119–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agyeman, J. 2005. Sustainable communities and the challenge of environmental justice. New York: NYU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alkon, A.H., and J. Agyeman (eds.). 2011. Cultivating food justice: Race, class and sustainability. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alston, D. 1991. Speech delivered at the first national people of color environmental leadership summit. http://reimaginerpe.org/20years/alston. Accessed 07 September 2015.

  • Bellina, L. 2016. Feeding cities sustainably: The contribution of a ‘zero-foodwaste-city’ to sustainable development goal 2, ‘zero hunger’. In EURSAFE. 2016. Food Futures. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Press.

  • Bennholdt-Thomsen, V., and M. Mies. 1997. Eine Kuh für Hillary: Die Subsistenzperspektive. München: Verlag Frauenoffensive.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biesecker, A., P. Darooka, D. Gottschlich, M. Lanuza, U. Röhr, C. Schildberg, M. Tovar-Restrepo, and V. Dias Ventura. 2014. A caring and sustainable economy: A concept note from a feminist perspective. http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/iez/10809.pdf. Accessed 12 March 2015.

  • Biesecker, A., and S. Hofmeister. 2010. Focus: (Re)productivity: Sustainable relations both between society and nature and between the genders. Ecological Economics 69(8): 1703–1711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biesecker, A., M. Mathes, S. Schön, and B. Scurrell (eds.). 2000. Vorsorgendes Wirtschaften: Auf dem Weg zu einer Ökonomie des Guten Lebens. Bielefeld: Kleine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brand, U., and M. Wissen. 2011. Sozial-ökologische Krise und Imperialistische Lebensweise. In VielfachKrise, ed. A. Demirovic, J. Dück, F. Becker, and P. Bader, 79–94. Hamburg: VSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, C. 2010. On Amartya Sen and “The idea of justice”. http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/publications/journal/24_3/review_essays/001.html. Accessed 15 January 2015.

  • Braidotti, R., E. Charkiewicz, S. Häusler, and S. Wierings (eds.). 1994. Women, the environment and sustainable development: towards a theoretical synthesis. London: Zed books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, B. 2011. Environmental crisis or crisis of epistemology? Working for sustainable knowledge and environmental justice. Garden City: Morgan James.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bullard, R.D. 1999. Confronting environmental racism: Voices from the grassroots. Cambridge: South End Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bullard, R.D. 2005. The quest for environmental justice: Human rights and the politics of pollution. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmin, J., and J. Agyeman (eds.). 2011. Environmental inequalities beyond borders. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 2002. Environmental justice policy. Boston: State House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curry, J.C. 2002. Care theory and “caring” systems of agriculture. Agriculture and Human Values 19(2): 119–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DAWN. 1995a. Development Alternatives for Women for a New Era. Markers on the way: The DAWN debates on alternative development. DAWN’s platform for the fourth world conference on women. Beijing, Barbados: DAWN.

  • DAWN. 1995b. Rethinking social development: DAWN’s vision. World Development 23(11): 2001–2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DAWN. 2015. About us. History. http://www.dawnnet.org/about.php?page=history. Accessed 15 January 2015.

  • Del Bene, D. 2014. India’s national alliance of people’s movement: 20 years of struggle. http://www.ejolt.org/2014/11/the-rise-of-a-movement-of-movements-in-india. Accessed 5 August 2015.

  • Derrida, J., and A. Dufourmantelle. 2000. Of Hospitality. Stanford: SU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. 2005. Rogues: Two essays on reason. Stanford: SU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. 2010 [1994]. Spectres of marx: The state of debt, the work of mourning and the new international. London: Routledge.

  • Dingler, J. 2003. Postmoderne und Nachhaltigkeit: Eine diskurstheoretische Analyse der sozialen Konstruktionen von nachhaltiger Entwicklung. München: oekom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Escobar, A. 2011. Encountering development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • EU Commission. 2012. Sustainable growth—for a resource efficient, greener and more competitive economy. http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/europe-2020-in-a-nutshell/priorities/sustainable-growth/index_en.htm. Accessed 12 March 2015.

  • Field, R.C. 1998. Risk and justice: Capitalist production and the environment. In The struggle for ecological democracy: Environmental justice movements in the United States, ed. D. Faber, 81–103. London: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N. 2000. Rethinking recognition. http://newleftreview.org/II/3/nancy-fraser-rethinking-recognition. Accessed 12 March 2015.

  • General Assembly. 2012. The future we want, resolution 66/288, 11 September 2012. http://unstats.un.org/unsd/broaderprogress/pdf/GA%20Resolution%20-%20The%20future%20we%20want. Accessed 16 January 2015.

  • Gottlieb, R., and A. Joshi. 2013. Food justice. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottschlich, D. 2013. Kommende Nachhaltigkeit: Bausteine für ein kritisch-emanzipatorisches Konzept nachhaltiger Entwicklung aus feministischer, diskurstheoretischer Perspektive. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Social Science. Osnabrück: Universität Osnabrück.

  • Gottschlich, D., S. Roth, A. Härtel, U. Röhr, S. Hackfort, D. Segebart, and C. König. 2014. Sustainable economy between gender, care and green economy. Debates—interfaces—blind spots. CaGE texts No. 1. http://www.cage-online.de. Accessed 26 February 2015.

  • Guha, R. 1997. Varieties of environmentalism: Essays north and south. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harcourt, W. (ed.). 1994. Feminist perspectives on sustainable development. London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauff, V. 1987. Vorwort. In Unsere gemeinsame Zukunft: Der Brundtland-Bericht der Weltkommission für Umwelt und Entwicklung, vol. X–XVII, ed. V. Hauff. Greven: Eggenkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hochschild, A. 2001. Globale Betreuungsketten und emotionaler Mehrwert. In Die Zukunft des globalen Kapitalismus, ed. W. Hutton, and A. Giddens, 156–176. Frankfurt am Main, New York: Campus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofmeister, S., C. Katz, and T. Mölders (eds.). 2013. Geschlechterverhältnisse und Nachhaltigkeit: Die Kategorie Geschlecht in den Nachhaltigkeitswissenschaften. Opladen: Barbara Budrich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holt-Giménez, E. 2011. Food security, food justice, or food sovereignty? Crises, food movements, and regime change. In Cultivating food justice: Race, class and sustainability, ed. A.H. Alkon, and J. Agyeman, 309–330. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jochimsen, M., and U. Knobloch. 2000. Eine Idee wächst. In Vorsorgendes Wirtschaften: Auf dem Weg zu einer Ökonomie des Guten Lebens, ed. A. Biesecker, M. Mathes, S. Schön, and B. Scurrell, 15–16. Bielefeld: Kleine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jochimsen, M. 2003. Careful economics. Integration caring activities and economic science. Boston, Dordrecht, London: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, V. 2008. Green collar economy: How one solution can fix our two biggest problems. New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kontos, M. 2010. Europäische Politiken im Zuge der Globalisierung von Pflegearbeit. http://www.gwi-boell.de/downloads/Kontos_Europaeische_Politiken_zu_globalisierter_Pflegearbeit_Mai2010.pdf. Accessed 26 February 2015.

  • Kothari, A., and S. Lovera. 2015. About dignity and transformation—Where will the SDGs lead us? Blog from the global forest coalition. https://peopleforestsrights.wordpress.com/. Accessed 26 February 2015.

  • Langer, A., and L. Bellina. 2017. Diskursanalyse und Feministische Kritik(en). In Diskursanalyse und Kritik, eds. A. Langer, M. Nonhoff, and M. Reisigl. Wiesbaden: Springer.

  • Massarrat, M. 2006. Kapitalismus—Machtungleichheit—Nachhaltigkeit: Perspektiven Revolutionärer Reformen. Hamburg: VSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, D. 2013. The democracy to come: Notes on the thought of Jacques Derrida. http://criticallegalthinking.com/2013/04/16/the-democracy-to-come-notes-on-the-thought-of-jacques-derrida/. Accessed 16 January 2015.

  • Muraca, B. 2012. Towards a fair degrowth-society: Justice and the right to a ‘good life’ beyond growth. Futures 44(6): 535–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nayar, A. 2011. Rio+20 Intersessional, 15–16 December 2011, Development Alternatives with Women for a New Era on behalf of the Women’s Major Group. http://www.dawnnet.org/uploads/documents/WEBSITE_RIO20_Anita_Intervention%20at%20Rio+20%20Intersessional_2011-Dec-16.PDF. Accessed 16 January 2015.

  • Nussbaum, M. 2000. Women and human development: The capabilities approach. Oxford: OU Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rajan, R. 2014. A history of environmental justice in India. Environmental Justice 7(5): 117–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. 2005 [1971]. A theory of justice: Original edition. Cambridge: Belknap Press.

  • Redclift, M. 2005. Sustainable development (1987–2005)—An oxymoron comes of age. http://www.scielo.br/pdf/ha/v12n25/a04v1225. Accessed 26 January 2015.

  • Salleh, A. 2009. Ecological debt: Embodied debt. eco-sufficiency and global justice. London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlosberg, D. 2007. Defining environmental justice: Theories, movements, and nature. Oxford: OU Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. 1999. Commodities and capabilities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, G., and C. Grown. 1987. Development, crises and alternative visions. Third world women’s perspectives. New York: Monthly Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiva, V. 1999. Biopiracy: The plunder of nature and knowledge. Boston: South End Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrader-Frechette, K. 2002. Environmental justice: Creating equity, reclaiming democracy. Oxford: OU Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson, M., and L.A. Schweitzer. 2011. Learning from the quest of environmental justice in the Niger River Delta. In Environmental inequalities beyond borders, ed. J. Carmin, and J. Agyeman, 45–66. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, V. 2000. Marketisation of governance: Critical feminist perspectives from the south. Cape Town: SADEP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tronto, J. 1993. Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tronto, J. 2013. Caring democracy: Markets, equality, and justice. New York: NYU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • UCCCRJ—United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice. 1987. Toxic wastes and race in the United States: A national report on the racial and socioeconomic characteristics of communities with hazardous waste sites. New York: United Church of Christ.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN—United Nations. 2002. Johannesburg declaration on sustainable development. A/CONF.199/20. http://www.un-documents.net/jburgdec.htm. Accessed 26 September 2014.

  • United Nations. 2008. Universal rights of indigenous people. http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf. Accessed 16 January 2015.

  • Weber, E. 2005. Deconstruction is Justice. German Law Journal 6(1): 179–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Well, B.L., and S. Gradwell. 2001. Gender and resource management: Community supported agriculture as caring-practice. Agriculture and Human Values 18(1): 107–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, R., and K. Pickert. 2009. The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better. London: Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiltshire, R. 1992. Environment and development: Grass roots women’s perspective. Barbados: DAWN.

    Google Scholar 

  • WCED—World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our common future. Oxford: OU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, I.M. 1990. Justice and the politics of difference. New York: NY Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniela Gottschlich.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gottschlich, D., Bellina, L. Environmental justice and care: critical emancipatory contributions to sustainability discourse. Agric Hum Values 34, 941–953 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-016-9761-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-016-9761-9

Keywords

Navigation