Climate change and environmental injustice in a bi-national context

Grineski, Sara E.; Collins, Timothy W.; Ford, Paula B.; Fitzgerald, Rosa M.; Aldouri, Raed; Velázquez-Angulo, Gilberto; Aguilar, María de Lourdes Romo; Lü, Daren

doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.05.013

Cited by 57 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We imagine that our methodological approach of projecting future socially vulnerable populations and their relative risk could improve upon previous investigations (e.g., see Frazier et al 2010 for storm surge; see Grineski et al 2012 for heatwaves) in future climate-related hazard and climate justice studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social vulnerability projections improve sea-level rise risk assessments

Hardy¹,

Hauer²

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rising seas will impact millions of coastal residents in coming decades. The vulnerability of coastal populations exposed to inundation will be greater for some sub-populations due to differences in their socio-demographic characteristics. Many climate risk and vulnerability assessments, however, model current populations against future environments. We advance sealevel rise risk assessments by dynamically modeling environmental change and sociodemographic change. We project three scenarios of inundation exposure due to future sea-level rise in coastal Georgia from 2010 to 2050. We align the sea-level rise projections with five population projection scenarios of socially vulnerable sub-populations via the Hamilton-Perry method and the theory of demographic metabolism. Our combined fast sea-level rise and middle population scenarios project a near doubling of the population exposed, and a more than fivefold increase for those at risk (i.e., residing in a census tract with high social vulnerability) and most at risk (i.e., high social vulnerability and high exposure) compared to the same estimate based on 2010 population data. Of vulnerable sub-populations, women had the largest absolute increase in exposure for all scenario combinations. The Hispanic/Latinx population's exposure increased the largest proportionally under the fast and medium sea-level rise projections and elderly people's (65+) under the slow sea-level rise scenario. Our findings suggest that for coastal areas experiencing rapid growth (or declines) in more socially vulnerable subpopulations, estimates based on current population data are likely to underestimate (or overestimate) the proportion of such groups' risk to inundation from future sea-level rise.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social vulnerability projections improve sea-level rise risk assessments

Hardy¹,

Hauer²

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, due to the market failure that is generally more severe in developing countries like Indonesia, with the growing impacts of climate change, regions with low economic level have suffered more than those with high economic one (Grineski et al, 2012;Patil and Deepa, 2007). It is a form of spatial inequality in the environmental aspects.…”

Section: Best Approach For Low Emission Development: Cac or Mbi?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards Low Emission Development: Prospects of Applying MBIs in the Industrial Sector of Central Java, Indonesia

Sugiri¹,

Buchori²

2016

American Journal of Environmental Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In dealing with pollution or emission, including in encouraging Low Emission Development (LED) as an acceptable strategy for climate change mitigation, Indonesia applies Command and Control (CAC) approach through regulations on environmental and pollution standards. However, the enforcement is characterized by weak monitoring and controlling due to aspects like non-compliant industries and lack of personnel and equipment of the corresponding agencies. Introducing Market Based Instruments (MBIs) can help better achievement in LED as evidenced in the USA, Australia, Taiwan, South Korea and Thailand. This study aims to answer the question "how can the Central Java Provincial Government (CJPG) facilitate better LED through the application of MBIs in the industrial sector?" The approach is qualitative through in-depth interviews with key persons from the CJPG and manufacturing industries with high rate of greenhouse gas emissions in Semarang and Surakarta metropolitans as the two largest industrial centers in Central Java. The results show that the CJPG cannot apply MBI approach in its purely theoretically forms. Instead, it is the principle, which is in accordance with the Equity-Based Development model that should be integrated into the CAC application, i.e., the polluters pay principle. The existing programs, like PROPER, should be refined conceptually and enforced more widely to accommodate 'internalizing the externality' principle better. More industries should be encouraged to participate in such programs.

show abstract

“…Additionally, the transformation of responsibility has been encouraged with the implementation of the EU Floods Directive in 2007, such as the introduction of Areas of Potentially Significant Flood Risk (APSFR), 1 insurance companies, or international risk-averse investors which request a re-thinking of the current financial distribution within hazard management (EC 2007;BMLFUW 2011BMLFUW , 2014PenningRowsell 2015;Husby et al 2016). One key question refers to the problem of social justice and injustice within this new policy direction, which plays a central role in the ongoing natural hazard management policy (Collins 2010;Grineski et al 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Allocation of risk and benefits—distributional justices in mountain hazard management

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As financing protection against mountain hazards becomes increasingly challenging and therefore investments have to be prioritized, dilemmas of justice emerge: some local governments and individuals benefit from natural hazard protection schemes, whereas others loose. Decisions on whom to protect often caused contradicting concepts of political understanding, which differ in interpretations of fair resource allocation and distribution. This paper analyses the impact of different philosophical schools of social justice on mountain hazard management in Austria. We used data from a spatially explicit, object-based assessment of elements at risk and compared potential distributional effects of three political jurisdictions. We found that-depending on the respective political direction-various local governments gain and others loose within the actual distributional system of mitigation strategies. The implementation of a utilitarian policy approach would cause that high income communities in hazard-prone areas would mainly benefit. Consequently, this policy direction would encourage the public administration to ignore their own failure in the past natural hazards management and prevention. On the other hand, following a Rawlsians approach mainly peripheral communities would gain from new policy direction who often show besides natural hazards problem mainly large socio-economic challenges. Finally, the most radical change would include the implementation of a liberalism policy, whereabouts the state only provides hazard information, but no further mitigation measures. These findings highlight the distributional consequences of future mountain hazard management strategies and point to the crucial selection of policy direction in navigating the selection of various adaptation schemes.

show abstract

Climate change and environmental injustice in a bi-national context

Cited by 57 publications

References 77 publications

Social vulnerability projections improve sea-level rise risk assessments

Social vulnerability projections improve sea-level rise risk assessments

Towards Low Emission Development: Prospects of Applying MBIs in the Industrial Sector of Central Java, Indonesia

Allocation of risk and benefits—distributional justices in mountain hazard management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About