清算气候种族隔离

IF 4.7 1区 社会学 Q1 GEOGRAPHY Political Geography Pub Date : 2024-05-01 DOI:10.1016/j.polgeo.2024.103117
Joshua Long
{"title":"清算气候种族隔离","authors":"Joshua Long","doi":"10.1016/j.polgeo.2024.103117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper provides a critical, interdisciplinary analysis of the current global landscape of climate action and response with the aim of determining its overall trajectory toward either justice and equity on the one hand, or exploitation and segregation on the other. It finds that tendencies toward the latter are far more pronounced. This paper summarizes those findings and presents arguments for three categories of climate action that are producing and/or exacerbating inequity, injustice, and segregation. They are: <em>securitization</em> (of resources, infrastructure, borders, and land), <em>financialization</em> (of exploitative mitigation and adaptation measures), and (<em>im)mobilization</em> (of migrants and the climate-vulnerable alongside the increased mobility of elite populations). An examination of the political rhetoric and public discourse associated with these trends follows, revealing widespread dehumanization and ‘othering’ used to condone a system that justifies protection for some populations and the expendability of others. Together, this analysis provides a framework for exposing and critiquing our current trajectory toward an outcome that is best described as climate apartheid.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48262,"journal":{"name":"Political Geography","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reckoning climate apartheid\",\"authors\":\"Joshua Long\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.polgeo.2024.103117\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper provides a critical, interdisciplinary analysis of the current global landscape of climate action and response with the aim of determining its overall trajectory toward either justice and equity on the one hand, or exploitation and segregation on the other. It finds that tendencies toward the latter are far more pronounced. This paper summarizes those findings and presents arguments for three categories of climate action that are producing and/or exacerbating inequity, injustice, and segregation. They are: <em>securitization</em> (of resources, infrastructure, borders, and land), <em>financialization</em> (of exploitative mitigation and adaptation measures), and (<em>im)mobilization</em> (of migrants and the climate-vulnerable alongside the increased mobility of elite populations). An examination of the political rhetoric and public discourse associated with these trends follows, revealing widespread dehumanization and ‘othering’ used to condone a system that justifies protection for some populations and the expendability of others. Together, this analysis provides a framework for exposing and critiquing our current trajectory toward an outcome that is best described as climate apartheid.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48262,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Geography\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Geography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0962629824000660\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Geography","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0962629824000660","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文对当前全球的气候行动和应对措施进行了批判性的跨学科分析,旨在确定其总体轨迹,是走向公正和公平,还是走向剥削和隔离。研究发现,后者的趋势更为明显。本文总结了这些发现,并提出三类气候行动正在产生和/或加剧不公平、不公正和隔离的论点。它们是:安全化(资源、基础设施、边界和土地)、金融化(剥削性减缓和适应措施)和(不)动员(移民和气候弱势群体以及精英人口流动性的增加)。随后对与这些趋势相关的政治言论和公共话语进行了研究,揭示了普遍存在的非人化和 "他者化 "现象,这种现象被用来纵容一种制度,这种制度为保护某些人群和牺牲另一些人群提供了理由。上述分析为揭露和批判我们当前的发展轨迹提供了一个框架,而这一轨迹的最佳描述就是气候种族隔离。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Reckoning climate apartheid

This paper provides a critical, interdisciplinary analysis of the current global landscape of climate action and response with the aim of determining its overall trajectory toward either justice and equity on the one hand, or exploitation and segregation on the other. It finds that tendencies toward the latter are far more pronounced. This paper summarizes those findings and presents arguments for three categories of climate action that are producing and/or exacerbating inequity, injustice, and segregation. They are: securitization (of resources, infrastructure, borders, and land), financialization (of exploitative mitigation and adaptation measures), and (im)mobilization (of migrants and the climate-vulnerable alongside the increased mobility of elite populations). An examination of the political rhetoric and public discourse associated with these trends follows, revealing widespread dehumanization and ‘othering’ used to condone a system that justifies protection for some populations and the expendability of others. Together, this analysis provides a framework for exposing and critiquing our current trajectory toward an outcome that is best described as climate apartheid.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
14.60%
发文量
210
期刊介绍: Political Geography is the flagship journal of political geography and research on the spatial dimensions of politics. The journal brings together leading contributions in its field, promoting international and interdisciplinary communication. Research emphases cover all scales of inquiry and diverse theories, methods, and methodologies.
期刊最新文献
‘I felt’: Intimate geographies of sentient diplomacy Knowledge popularization in a technocratic-populist context, or how the Israeli state shaped media coverage of large-scale urban plans Introduction to the special issue – Frontiers of property: promises, pitfalls, and ambivalences of ‘resurgent collectivisation’ in global land and resource governance Checkpoints, competing ‘sovereignties’, and everyday life in Iraq
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1