The mobilisation of norms for legitimacy in the global warming debate

Abstract

Contemporary debates surrounding global commons issues and their amelioration are inextricably linked with a parallel discourse of environmental justice. This paper examines the normative discourses of rights and justice in the international arena, particularly in relation to the global climate change debate. It is argued that the discourse of environmental justice has served as a focus in negotiations on the issue of climate change. However, justice and rights, and how they are defined, have also been significantly contested. The terms “justice” and “rights” have been mobilised by numerous stakeholders in the debate over climate change as they seek moral and political legitimacy for their understandings of environmental justice regarding emissions reduction proposals, and justice for the currently, and potentially, affected populations. Differing claims within the discourse pivot on arguments over equity versus equality and what might constitute them in the politics of climate change. In particular, this paper focuses on the claims of nongovernmental environment groups campaigning on the climate change issue in the Asia-Pacific region. The non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and others argue that the humanitarian impact of global climate change presents significant issues for the Asia Pacific region. These groups draw significant connections between environmental justice and human rights in their advocacy for vulnerable populations in the Pacific, arguing for environmental justice. This paper examines two instances of the use of established normative frameworks that are used to gather and mobilise legitimacy in the global warming debate.