The political ontology of climate change: moral meteorology, climate justice, and the coloniality of reality in the Bolivian Andes

Abstract

Taking Boaventura de Sousa Santos' argument that there is no global social justice without global cognitive justice as its starting point, this article suggests that there is no global climate justice without global cognitive justice (implying both ontological justice and epistemological justice). If we take "the ontological turn" in anthropology and other disciplines and its focus on indigenous ontologies seriously, however, we seem to end up in a situation that is difficult to maneuver in relation to conventional understandings of climate justice. When discussing climate change in relation to multiple ontologies, there are two risks: 1) reproducing what I call "the coloniality of reality", arguing that indigenous ontologies are actually nothing but a cultural (mis-) representation of the world; 2) reproducing a conservative relativism that leads to nothing but the maintenance of status quo and that bears a resemblance to climate change denial. A thorough ethnographic understanding of what I would call "the moral meteorology" of the Andes and a broadened understanding of climate change, however, make it possible to navigate between the Scylla of coloniality and the Charybdis of relativism and to articulate a radical critique of fossil-fueled capitalism from a relational ontology, demanding climate justice while denouncing coloniality, and discussing the political ontology of climate change without ignoring its political ecology -and vice versa. Key words: Coloniality; climate justice; cognitive justice; political ontology; political ecology; Aymara. RésuméPrenant l'argument de Boaventura de Sousa Santos selon lequel il n'existe pas de justice sociale globale sans la justice cognitive globale, cet article suggère qu'il n'y a pas de justice climatique mondiale sans justice cognitive globale (impliquant à la fois la justice ontologique et la justice épistémologique). Si nous prenons «le tournant ontologique» dans l'anthropologie et d'autres disciplines et que nous mettons l'accent sur les ontologies autochtones au sérieux, nous semblons finir dans une situation difficile par rapport à la compréhension conventionnelle de la justice climatique. Lorsqu'on parle du changement climatique par rapport aux multiples ontologies, il existe deux risques: 1) reproduire ce que j'appelle «la colonialité de la réalité», arguant que les ontologies autochtones ne sont en réalité qu'une culture (une mauvaise représentation du monde) et 2 ) Reproduisant un relativisme conservateur qui ne conduit qu'à l'entretien du statu quo, se rapprochant du déni du changement climatique. Une compréhension ethnographique approfondie de ce que j'appelle «la météorologie morale» des Andes et une compréhension élargie du changement climatique permet cependant de naviguer entre la Scylla de la colonisation et les Charybdis du relativisme et d'articuler une critique radicale des fossiles, A alimenté le capitalisme. Cela diffère d'une ontologie relationnelle -exigeant la justice climatique tout en dénonçant la colonialité et en discutant de l'on...

Admitting uncertainty, transforming engagement: towards caring practices for sustainability beyond climate change

“…Such affectiveethical dispositions in looking after damaged and neglected ecologies (of humans and nonhumans) constitute the ethos of caring practices. However, considering the difficulties entailed in figuring out the boundaries of collectives that perform caring practices (Giraud et al 2018), and the reification risked in approaching the different cooperating hybrid collectives as discrete (Burman 2017), it is important to admit that any framing of caring practices and their (transformative) engagement will be subject to uncertainties of the kind discussed below.…”

The Consequences of Swedish National Law on Sámi Self-Constitution—The Shift from a Relational Understanding of Who Is Sámi Toward a Rights-Based Understanding

“…These places have guardian spirits with whom you, in one way or another, must be in agreement with (also see Balto & Kuhmunen, 2014). It is an ontologically informed world in which places have agency, intentionality and subjectivity that people have to relate to in a correct way (Burman, 2017). One way of doing so is through understanding, generosity and the desire to reach agreement, not only with other people but also with the world (Oskal, 1995).…”

Charting knowledge co‐production pathways in climate and development

“…The need for robust evidence and enabling policies for responding to current and projected climate impacts is perhaps most acutely felt in developing countries where large vulnerable populations face significant threats to their livelihoods and well-being (De Souza et al, 2015;IPCC, 2014). Doing so, they argue, is critical to ensuring that research findings and resulting recommendations are seen as salient, legitimate, credible, just, and useable (Burman, 2017;Cash et al, 2003;Dilling & Lemos, 2011;Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1995;Van Kerkhoff & Lebel, 2015). Doing so, they argue, is critical to ensuring that research findings and resulting recommendations are seen as salient, legitimate, credible, just, and useable (Burman, 2017;Cash et al, 2003;Dilling & Lemos, 2011;Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1995;Van Kerkhoff & Lebel, 2015).…”

“…A growing number of voices argue that these challenges call for approaches to knowledge creation that transgress disciplinary boundaries and include the knowledge and perspectives of nonacademics, including impacted communities in developing countries. Doing so, they argue, is critical to ensuring that research findings and resulting recommendations are seen as salient, legitimate, credible, just, and useable (Burman, 2017;Cash et al, 2003;Dilling & Lemos, 2011;Funtowicz & Ravetz, 1995;Van Kerkhoff & Lebel, 2015).…”