土著人民参与碳定价决策

IF 4.9 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental Science & Policy Pub Date : 2024-10-11 DOI:10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103927
Ignatius Kobbina Yankey , Temitope Tunbi Onifade , Gabriela Sabau
{"title":"土著人民参与碳定价决策","authors":"Ignatius Kobbina Yankey ,&nbsp;Temitope Tunbi Onifade ,&nbsp;Gabriela Sabau","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103927","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The article contributes new thinking on the exclusion and inclusion of Indigenous Peoples in carbon pricing policymaking. Using a Canadian case to draw broader lessons for other countries and make a conceptual contribution, we ask and answer five questions: (1) who is excluded; (2) why does exclusion happen; (3) how does exclusion happen; (4) what does exclusion cause; and (5) how could policymakers enhance inclusion? To inform and answer these questions, we construct a decolonial theoretical framework and use it to guide qualitative analysis and doctrinal legal analysis of original data, including 34 semi-structured interviews and few court decisions, to enhance thinking on exclusion and how to enhance inclusion in carbon pricing policymaking. The thesis is that Indigenous Peoples are externally and internally excluded because of legal and practical problems in policymaking, and this impacts legitimacy, transparency, justice, policy effectiveness and indigenous reconciliation, and should be mitigated by enhancing transparency measures, prioritizing the value of legitimacy over cost efficiency, and, overall, transformationally rethinking policymaking processes. Altogether, our theory-grounded empirical sociolegal study demonstrates key concepts for thinking about Indigenous inclusion and exclusion, extending the extant public participation literature as applicable to climate, natural resource, and environmental law and governance, and other relevant legal and social science fields.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"162 ","pages":"Article 103927"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Indigenous peoples in carbon pricing policymaking\",\"authors\":\"Ignatius Kobbina Yankey ,&nbsp;Temitope Tunbi Onifade ,&nbsp;Gabriela Sabau\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103927\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The article contributes new thinking on the exclusion and inclusion of Indigenous Peoples in carbon pricing policymaking. Using a Canadian case to draw broader lessons for other countries and make a conceptual contribution, we ask and answer five questions: (1) who is excluded; (2) why does exclusion happen; (3) how does exclusion happen; (4) what does exclusion cause; and (5) how could policymakers enhance inclusion? To inform and answer these questions, we construct a decolonial theoretical framework and use it to guide qualitative analysis and doctrinal legal analysis of original data, including 34 semi-structured interviews and few court decisions, to enhance thinking on exclusion and how to enhance inclusion in carbon pricing policymaking. The thesis is that Indigenous Peoples are externally and internally excluded because of legal and practical problems in policymaking, and this impacts legitimacy, transparency, justice, policy effectiveness and indigenous reconciliation, and should be mitigated by enhancing transparency measures, prioritizing the value of legitimacy over cost efficiency, and, overall, transformationally rethinking policymaking processes. Altogether, our theory-grounded empirical sociolegal study demonstrates key concepts for thinking about Indigenous inclusion and exclusion, extending the extant public participation literature as applicable to climate, natural resource, and environmental law and governance, and other relevant legal and social science fields.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Science & Policy\",\"volume\":\"162 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103927\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Science & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901124002612\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901124002612","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

文章对碳定价决策中土著居民的排斥和包容问题提出了新的思考。通过加拿大的案例,我们提出并回答了五个问题:(1) 谁被排除在外;(2) 为什么会发生排除;(3) 如何发生排除;(4) 排除的原因是什么;(5) 政策制定者如何增强包容性?为了提供信息并回答这些问题,我们构建了一个非殖民主义理论框架,并用它指导对原始数据(包括 34 个半结构式访谈和少数法院判决)的定性分析和理论法律分析,以加强对碳定价决策中的排斥和如何加强包容性的思考。我们的论点是,由于政策制定中的法律和实际问题,土著居民受到外部和内部排斥,这影响了合法性、透明度、公正性、政策有效性和土著和解,应通过加强透明度措施、优先考虑合法性价值而非成本效益,以及从整体上对政策制定过程进行变革性反思来加以缓解。总之,我们以理论为基础的实证社会法律研究展示了思考土著包容和排斥的关键概念,扩展了现有的公众参与文献,使其适用于气候、自然资源、环境法律和治理,以及其他相关的法律和社会科学领域。
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
Indigenous peoples in carbon pricing policymaking
The article contributes new thinking on the exclusion and inclusion of Indigenous Peoples in carbon pricing policymaking. Using a Canadian case to draw broader lessons for other countries and make a conceptual contribution, we ask and answer five questions: (1) who is excluded; (2) why does exclusion happen; (3) how does exclusion happen; (4) what does exclusion cause; and (5) how could policymakers enhance inclusion? To inform and answer these questions, we construct a decolonial theoretical framework and use it to guide qualitative analysis and doctrinal legal analysis of original data, including 34 semi-structured interviews and few court decisions, to enhance thinking on exclusion and how to enhance inclusion in carbon pricing policymaking. The thesis is that Indigenous Peoples are externally and internally excluded because of legal and practical problems in policymaking, and this impacts legitimacy, transparency, justice, policy effectiveness and indigenous reconciliation, and should be mitigated by enhancing transparency measures, prioritizing the value of legitimacy over cost efficiency, and, overall, transformationally rethinking policymaking processes. Altogether, our theory-grounded empirical sociolegal study demonstrates key concepts for thinking about Indigenous inclusion and exclusion, extending the extant public participation literature as applicable to climate, natural resource, and environmental law and governance, and other relevant legal and social science fields.
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
Environmental Science & Policy
Environmental Science & Policy 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
332
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Policy promotes communication among government, business and industry, academia, and non-governmental organisations who are instrumental in the solution of environmental problems. It also seeks to advance interdisciplinary research of policy relevance on environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity, environmental pollution and wastes, renewable and non-renewable natural resources, sustainability, and the interactions among these issues. The journal emphasises the linkages between these environmental issues and social and economic issues such as production, transport, consumption, growth, demographic changes, well-being, and health. However, the subject coverage will not be restricted to these issues and the introduction of new dimensions will be encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Forest owners’ perceptions of machine learning: Insights from swedish forestry Understanding how landscape value and climate risk discourses can improve adaptation planning: Insights from Q-method Articulating futures: Community storylines and assisted ecosystem adaptation in the Great Barrier Reef Insights into the public engagement of coastal geoscientists Flood data platform governance: Identifying the technological and socio-technical approach(es) differences
×
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