International aid, trade and investment and access and allocation

Scobie, Michelle

doi:10.1007/s10784-020-09480-w

Cited by 4 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, if markets allocate scarce resources, the price goes up, aggravating inequality. Trade and investment regimes, while aiming to improve the lives and livelihoods of people, often achieve these goals at the cost of vulnerable people, sectors and countries (Gonenc et al, 2020 ; Scobie, 2020 ). Resource extraction in countries with poor labour/environmental regulations leads to socio-ecological exploitation of the poor (Scobie, 2020 ), despite rules on access and benefit sharing in the biodiversity regime.…”

Section: Going Beyond: Implications For the 2030 Agendamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Trade and investment regimes, while aiming to improve the lives and livelihoods of people, often achieve these goals at the cost of vulnerable people, sectors and countries (Gonenc et al, 2020 ; Scobie, 2020 ). Resource extraction in countries with poor labour/environmental regulations leads to socio-ecological exploitation of the poor (Scobie, 2020 ), despite rules on access and benefit sharing in the biodiversity regime. Resource use in a market allocation model ensures that those who can afford resources will buy them up in a market where resource scarcity pushes up prices, thus pushing out those who cannot afford to pay for these resources or who have insecure access through unrecognized tenure rights (e.g.…”

Section: Going Beyond: Implications For the 2030 Agendamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Markets in combination with perverse subsidies affects access. Subsidies in the Global North affect poverty in the Global South—as they encourage overfishing and overuse of fossil energy (Scobie, 2020 ). The policy climate allows western governments to sell old plastic and electronic goods to the South while also transferring the burden of waste management to them (Cotta, 2020 ).…”

Section: Going Beyond: Implications For the 2030 Agendamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Third, even within the world of international aid (philanthropy and government aid), there is a tendency to mask the underlying causes of global inequality while focusing symbolically on access issues and often only temporarily (Scobie, 2020 ). For example, public money is used for export credit to support western producers to invest in fossil fuel in the South which leads to a fossil fuel lock-in and debt in the latter (Gupta et al, 2020 ).…”

Section: Going Beyond: Implications For the 2030 Agendamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Much of justice literature focuses on how, despite good intentions underpinning access and allocation mechanisms, they do not deliver equitable and just outcomes (Coolsaet et al, 2020 ). However, there are also empirical stories of success in securing both, where biodiversity aid and crowd funding have enhanced species protection (Scobie, 2020 ).…”

Section: Going Beyond: Implications For the 2030 Agendamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Equity, justice and the SDGs: lessons learnt from two decades of INEA scholarship

Gupta

Vegelin

2022

Int Environ Agreements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental justice issues have been incrementally but consistently covered within this journal in the last two decades. This article reviews theoretical and empirical approaches to justice in INEA scholarship in order to identify trends and draw lessons for the interpretation and implementation of the 2030 Agenda and for living within environmental limits. Our review traces how justice considerations were initially covered within new institutionalist scholarship on collective action and social practices, to conceptualizing justice as ‘access and allocation’, to newer notions of planetary justice. We link these trends to scholarship on diverse epistemologies and typologies of justice, including conservative, corrective, distributive and procedural justice, and examine their operationalization within the empirical domains of climate, water and sustainable development. In concluding, we draw out implications for the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda. We argue that a just approach is essential to living within environmental limits, with greater synergies needed between collective action and social practice approaches. While justice can be unpacked for practical and political reasons into access and allocation, we find that (procedural) access considerations are more politically palatable in practice than a concern with allocation (distributive justice), which remains much more contested. As such, dominant approaches promote ‘conservative’ or thin market-based notions of justice. We conclude by noting that just allocation is a precondition to just access. A failure to prioritize and achieve more corrective and distributive forms of justice will, without doubt, contribute to exacerbating global ecological degradation.

show abstract

Section: Going Beyond: Implications For the 2030 Agendamentioning

confidence: 99%