我们的空气有多公平?印度德里空气污染话语中的程序、分配和承认的不公正

IF 2.4 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Environmental Sociology Pub Date : 2022-11-27 DOI:10.1080/23251042.2022.2151398
Bhavna Joshi, Pradip Swarnakar
{"title":"我们的空气有多公平?印度德里空气污染话语中的程序、分配和承认的不公正","authors":"Bhavna Joshi, Pradip Swarnakar","doi":"10.1080/23251042.2022.2151398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The risk profile of air pollution generates multiple meanings of justice for diverse stakeholders. We examined 535 articles from two Indian newspapers published between 2017 and 2020 and obtained 13 concepts of justice pertinent to ambient air pollution in Delhi. Employing the theoretical perspective of environmental justice, we observed the prevalence of procedural and distributive justice discourses with dominant participation from non-governmental organizations and academic institutions. Recognition justice emerged the most underrepresented of all discourses. We used Discourse Network Analysis to reveal the prominence of Indian citizens, the Supreme Court of India, and farmers in the justice debate, and an overall restricted participation of the government bodies. Our findings highlight polarization among the academic and the non-academic actors on the disproportionate effect of air pollution. For air pollution mitigation in Delhi, we suggest organized and inclusive participation by diverse stakeholders in decision-making, acknowledging socio-cultural differences among populations.","PeriodicalId":54173,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How fair is our air? The injustice of procedure, distribution, and recognition within the discourse of air pollution in Delhi, India\",\"authors\":\"Bhavna Joshi, Pradip Swarnakar\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23251042.2022.2151398\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The risk profile of air pollution generates multiple meanings of justice for diverse stakeholders. We examined 535 articles from two Indian newspapers published between 2017 and 2020 and obtained 13 concepts of justice pertinent to ambient air pollution in Delhi. Employing the theoretical perspective of environmental justice, we observed the prevalence of procedural and distributive justice discourses with dominant participation from non-governmental organizations and academic institutions. Recognition justice emerged the most underrepresented of all discourses. We used Discourse Network Analysis to reveal the prominence of Indian citizens, the Supreme Court of India, and farmers in the justice debate, and an overall restricted participation of the government bodies. Our findings highlight polarization among the academic and the non-academic actors on the disproportionate effect of air pollution. For air pollution mitigation in Delhi, we suggest organized and inclusive participation by diverse stakeholders in decision-making, acknowledging socio-cultural differences among populations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54173,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Sociology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Sociology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2022.2151398\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2022.2151398","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要空气污染的风险状况为不同的利益相关者带来了正义的多重含义。我们研究了2017年至2020年间发表的两家印度报纸的535篇文章,获得了与德里环境空气污染有关的13个司法概念。运用环境正义的理论视角,我们观察到非政府组织和学术机构主导参与的程序正义和分配正义话语的盛行。承认正义是所有话语中代表性最差的。我们使用话语网络分析来揭示印度公民、印度最高法院和农民在司法辩论中的突出地位,以及政府机构的总体参与受到限制。我们的研究结果突显了学术和非学术行为者在空气污染的过度影响方面的两极分化。对于德里的空气污染缓解,我们建议不同的利益相关者有组织、包容地参与决策,承认人口之间的社会文化差异。
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
How fair is our air? The injustice of procedure, distribution, and recognition within the discourse of air pollution in Delhi, India
ABSTRACT The risk profile of air pollution generates multiple meanings of justice for diverse stakeholders. We examined 535 articles from two Indian newspapers published between 2017 and 2020 and obtained 13 concepts of justice pertinent to ambient air pollution in Delhi. Employing the theoretical perspective of environmental justice, we observed the prevalence of procedural and distributive justice discourses with dominant participation from non-governmental organizations and academic institutions. Recognition justice emerged the most underrepresented of all discourses. We used Discourse Network Analysis to reveal the prominence of Indian citizens, the Supreme Court of India, and farmers in the justice debate, and an overall restricted participation of the government bodies. Our findings highlight polarization among the academic and the non-academic actors on the disproportionate effect of air pollution. For air pollution mitigation in Delhi, we suggest organized and inclusive participation by diverse stakeholders in decision-making, acknowledging socio-cultural differences among populations.
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 Sociology
Environmental Sociology ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
12.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Environmental Sociology is dedicated to applying and advancing the sociological imagination in relation to a wide variety of environmental challenges, controversies and issues, at every level from the global to local, from ‘world culture’ to diverse local perspectives. As an international, peer-reviewed scholarly journal, Environmental Sociology aims to stretch the conceptual and theoretical boundaries of both environmental and mainstream sociology, to highlight the relevance of sociological research for environmental policy and management, to disseminate the results of sociological research, and to engage in productive dialogue and debate with other disciplines in the social, natural and ecological sciences. Contributions may utilize a variety of theoretical orientations including, but not restricted to: critical theory, cultural sociology, ecofeminism, ecological modernization, environmental justice, organizational sociology, political ecology, political economy, post-colonial studies, risk theory, social psychology, science and technology studies, globalization, world-systems analysis, and so on. Cross- and transdisciplinary contributions are welcome where they demonstrate a novel attempt to understand social-ecological relationships in a manner that engages with the core concerns of sociology in social relationships, institutions, practices and processes. All methodological approaches in the environmental social sciences – qualitative, quantitative, integrative, spatial, policy analysis, etc. – are welcomed. Environmental Sociology welcomes high-quality submissions from scholars around the world.
期刊最新文献
Place-based understanding of Chilika fishery: power, affect, and materiality When water policies derail livelihood aspirations: farmers’ agency in everyday politics in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta Driving environmental inequality: the unequal harms and benefits of highways Acting on climate change concerns: lay perceptions of possibility, complexity and constraint Is an urban waste-to-energy plant a “green” megaproject? The power of narratives in shaping the city: a Danish case study
×
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