ABSTRACT

Several streams of research have discussed important aspects of social inequalities and justice in the context of climate, energy, and environmental issues. However, there is often a narrow focus on specific aspects, bearing the risk that tensions and trade-offs for policy are easily overlooked, and sometimes involving a loose, implicit, inconsistent, or uncritical use of the term justice. I argue to clearly separate the empirical analysis of inequalities from their normative assessment, and to adequately consider the large variety of potentially relevant inequalities as well as the variety of justice principles. In support of such an approach, this article suggests categorizations of (1) basic dimensions of social inequality in the context of climate and environment; (2) different social impacts of climate and environmental policies; and (3) different justice principles. The overall aim is to have typologies and an organizing framework at hand that help to systematically identify a broad range of inequalities which can then be discussed against different justice principles. This shall allow a better detection of intersectionality and policy trade-offs as well as broader-based normative judgments in research and in policy assessments (evaluations).

Key policy insights

• To consider social justice in the context of climate policy, it is key to acknowledge the large variety of inequalities along different dimensions and impact categories, including intersectionality and trade-offs.

• Many claims about (in)justice of a specific policy or a transition do not reflect this variety.

• Policy impact assessments and evaluations should make a clearer distinction between social change processes and human impacts. Moreover, they should focus on net impacts that account for all relevant drivers, adaptation reactions and feedback loops.

• The empirical analysis of inequalities should be separated from the normative discussion of their (in)justice implications. For a normative discussion, the wide variety of different justice principles should be acknowledged.

摘要

几项研究已经讨论了气候、能源和环境问题背景下社会不平等和正义的重要方面。然而，往往狭隘地关注特定方面，承担着政策紧张和权衡容易被忽视的风险，有时涉及对正义一词的松散、含蓄、不一致或不加批判的使用。我主张将不平等的实证分析与其规范评估明确分开，并充分考虑各种潜在相关的不平等以及正义原则的多样性。为了支持这种方法，本文建议对 (1) 气候和环境背景下社会不平等的基本维度进行分类；(2) 气候和环境政策的不同社会影响；(3)不同的正义原则。总体目标是手头有类型学和组织框架，有助于系统地识别范围广泛的不平等现象，然后可以根据不同的正义原则进行讨论。这将允许更好地检测交叉性和政策权衡，以及在研究和政策评估（评估）中做出更广泛的规范判断。

关键政策见解

• 要在气候政策的背景下考虑社会正义，关键是要承认不同维度和影响类别的各种不平等，包括交叉性和权衡。

• 许多关于特定政策或过渡的（不）公正的说法并没有反映出这种多样性。

• 政策影响评估和评估应更清楚地区分社会变革过程和人类影响。此外，他们应该关注影响所有相关驱动因素、适应反应和反馈回路的净影响。

• 不平等的实证分析应与其（不）正义影响的规范性讨论分开。对于规范性讨论，应该承认各种不同的正义原则。