Authoritarian environmentalism, just transition, and the tension between environmental protection and social justice in China's forestry reform

Implications of COVID-19 for Climate Governance in China: The Rise of an Eco-Surveillance State?

“…Perhaps the real debate is on how to balance, or even resolve, the tension between the urgency of climate action and concerns, such as privacy protection and liberty, and ensuring public participation in the decision-making process [73]. Transitioning away from carbon-intensive growth is urgently needed, but it is also important to do so in a just and socially acceptable manner [74][75][76][77]. In this sense, the power offered by surveillance could be appealing, but socio-political concerns are real and should be addressed as much as possible.…”

Authoritarian Environmentalism—Captured Collaboration in Vietnamese Water Management

“…An emphasis on policy expediency and a belief in eco-elites being best placed to make environmental decisions unavoidably favour large-scale state environmental interventions. Studies conducted over several decades show that, while these interventions almost categorically favour direct state and elite economic benefits, they at the same time disproportionately affect the livelihoods of smaller remote communities and ignore local sustainability impacts (Lo 2021 ), giving rise to calls for policy change in society. They may further have devastating socio-economic impacts and exacerbate an unequal distribution of economic wealth and environmental harm between rural and urban communities (Bruun 2012 ; Lo 2020 ).…”

“…Multiple studies have coupled the rise of state environmentalism in real-life authoritarian regimes with increasing use of repressive power, including new digital controls and restrictions on civil society. For instance, studies suggest that the more there is at stake in environmental conditions that may foster social upheaval and destabilisation, the harsher and more exclusively authoritarian are the means of government (Ahlers and Shen 2018 : 301), that a distinct paradigm of re-centralised environmental governance has emerged in China under Xi Jinping (Chen and Lees 2018 ; Lo 2021 ), and that environmental governance increasingly forms part of a much larger effort at centralisation and power consolidation in the hands of the state (Kostka and Zhang 2018 ; Li and Shapiro 2020 : 24): this may in turn potentially increase the power of technocrats. At the same time, instead of coercing citizens into submission a common new model is based on the conscious manipulation of information, including imitations of democracy, efforts to conceal state repression, and the adoption of a rhetoric of performance (Guriev and Treisman 2019 ) in which environmental and ecological rhetoric are among the key means of demonstrating competitiveness.…”

Sociálna spravodlivosť a starobné dôchodkové sporenie v SR

“…Inými slovami ide o inštitucionalizovanú podobu spravodlivosti. Otázky spravodlivosti v tejto rovine sa potom dotýkajú tém ako sociálna politika a sociálne zabezpečenie (Geffert, 2014(Geffert, , 2019(Geffert, , 2020; restoratívny a retributívny princíp trestnej justície (Gerson, 2022;Lichner & Šlosár, 2018;Prusiński, 2020), životné prostredie (pozri napríklad Kim, Woosnam, & Kim, 2022;Lo, 2021) alebo aj multikulturalizmus (pozri napríklad Flora, 2014;Levy & Patz, 2015;van Bohemen, 2021).…”