Environmental justice and biospheric egalitarianism: reflecting on a normative-philosophical view of human-nature relationship

Kopnina, Helen

doi:10.1186/2194-6434-1-8

Cited by 39 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…I seek to ecocentrically qualify the notion of environmental justice, emphasizing the ideological persistence of anthropocentrism, which also permeates and limits our very ideas of ethics, equality, and justice (Crist & Kopnina, 2014;Kopnina, 2012cKopnina, , 2013dKopnina, , 2014bKopnina, , 2014cKopnina, , 2014dShoreman-Ouimet & Kopnina, 2015). Environmental justice concerns, as commonly conceived (e.g., Gleeson & Low, 1999), seek to socially and economically redress the inequitable distribution of environmental burdens (e.g., pollution, climate change) and benefits (e.g., natural resources, ecosystem services) both within and between nations (e.g., Gleeson & Low, 1999;Saha, 2010;Kopnina, 2014g). Within this "social"' conception of environmental justice, the concept of environmental racism, for example, refers to the placement of low-income or minority communities in proximity of environmentally hazardous or degraded environments (Saha, 2010).…”

Section: The Context: Sustainable Development and Environmental Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

Of big hegemonies and little tigers: Ecocentrism and environmental justice

Kopnina

2016

The Journal of Environmental Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Context: Sustainable Development and Environmental Justicementioning

confidence: 99%

Of big hegemonies and little tigers: Ecocentrism and environmental justice

Kopnina

2016

The Journal of Environmental Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The defining characteristic of 'colonisation' in general, along with the increase of social inequalities, is the ever-greater instrumentalism in human engagements with nonhuman inhabitants (Strang 2016). This entails the self-proclaimed right to undermine another species' very existence and the evolutionary unfolding in the noble quest for social justice (Kopnina 2012a(Kopnina , 2012b(Kopnina , 2014aCafaro and Primack 2014), in effect condoning 'nonhuman genocide' (Crist 2012, 140). Accusations that conservationists are 'out of control' to save the near-extinct species (Büscher 2015) testifies to a robust anthropocentric bias, and a refusal to acknowledge the legal repercussions of ecocide (Higgins 2010).…”

Section: Anthropocentric Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sometimes, environmental justice includes ecological justice or 'rights of nature', which refers to the justice between species (Kopnina 2014a). The advocates of the 'rights to nature' approach support different groups' entitlements to the benefits derived from natural resources and ecosystem services (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Supporters of the 'rights of nature' perspective (e.g. Cafaro and Primack 2014;Kopnina 2012aKopnina , 2014aKopnina , 2016aKopnina , 2016b point out that the refusal to acknowledge the objectivity of wilderness is a denial 'that we are residents on a planet where there is nature that transcends humans, and that various organisms pursue their own lives independently of our culture' (Rolston 1997, 40). Supporters of conservation point out the multiple instances of nonhuman displacement and ecocide, or killing of millions of non-humans for meat or other uses, or destruction of or loss of ecosystem (Higgins 2010), and call for the recognition of ecological justice (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nobody Likes Dichotomies (But Sometimes You Need Them)

Kopnina¹

2016

Anthropological Forum

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental anthropologists attempt to accommodate social justice while seeking to reconcile more-than-human relations and responsibilities towards their habitats. This article acknowledges areas of tension between local livelihoods and international conservation efforts, between indigenous peoples and wildlife, between traditional lifeways and development, and finally between different types of ethical assumptions that underlie anthropological advocacy. A number of dichotomies that are inherent in these tensions are discussed. With regard to the ecocentric/anthropocentric dichotomy, I argue that while human and environmental interests are sometimes intertwined, ecocentrism is necessary if non-humans are to be protected outside of utilitarian interests. With regard to the 'neoliberal conservation/local communities' dichotomy, I argue that blaming conservation for the violation of social justice depoliticises the issue of ecological injustice. Through a critical discussion of these dichotomies, this article examines the role of environmental anthropology in addressing today's pressing environmental issues, particularly the loss of biodiversity, with respect to the 'conservation' of communities and that of protected areas.

show abstract

“…In some instances, environmental justice includes ecological justice or biospheric egalitarianism, which refers to justice between human and non-human species (Kopnina 2014). It is the former type of justice that SDG's are mostly concerned with.…”

Section: Marginalisation Of Environmental Justice and Biospheric Egalmentioning

confidence: 99%

The victims of unsustainability: a challenge to sustainable development goals

Kopnina

2015

International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ec

Self Cite

160

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental unsustainability is due to both structural features and historically specific characteristics of industrial capitalism resulting in specific patterns of production and consumption, as well as population growth. Sustainability literature criticises the established corporate and political power hegemonies, interested in maintaining economic growth, as well as inability or unwillingness of citizen-consumers to counteract these hegemonic tendencies. Yet, official policies are still targeted at social and economic 'development' as a panacea for unsustainability challenges. Instead, renewed accent on social and economic objectives are outlined by a set of sustainable development goals (SDG) that include objectives of fighting poverty, promoting better health, reducing mortality, and stimulating equitable economic growth. What is less commonly critiqued is the underlying morality of unsustainability and ethical questions concerned with the 'victims of unsustainability' outside of socioeconomic discourse. The achievement of SDG goals, as will be further elaborated on in this article, is unlikely to lead to greater social equality and economic prosperity, but to a greater spread of unsustainable production and consumption, continuous economic as well as population growth that has caused environmental problems in the first place and further objectification of environment and its elements. This article argues that an invocation of ethical duty toward environment and its elements is required in order to move beyond the current status quo. Such ethical approach to unsustainability can effectively address the shortcomings of the mainstream sustainability discourse that is mainly anthropocentric and therefore fails to identify the correct locus of unsustainability.

show abstract

Environmental justice and biospheric egalitarianism: reflecting on a normative-philosophical view of human-nature relationship

Abstract: The recent shift towards the interdisciplinary study of the human

Cited by 39 publications

References 31 publications

Of big hegemonies and little tigers: Ecocentrism and environmental justice

Of big hegemonies and little tigers: Ecocentrism and environmental justice

Nobody Likes Dichotomies (But Sometimes You Need Them)

The victims of unsustainability: a challenge to sustainable development goals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About