LEGITIMIZATION FOR CLIMATE GOVERNANCE AND LITIGATION FROM THE CONCEPTUAL EXPANSION OF JUSTICE

APPROXIMATIONS BETWEEN THE NARRATIVES OF MARY ROBINSON AND THE THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES OF NANCY FRASER

Abstract

The consequences of global warming have led to various questions about the effectiveness of climate governance architectures. In some respects, the issue is a transnational public problem, since it is treated as concerning to the global society, giving rise to numerous controversies regarding its causes and consequences and generating expectations regarding its solution. This article deals with an area that is generally treated as peripheral to the debate, related to the inequitable distribution of the consequences of climate change. Its aim is to analyze the potential of action of communities most vulnerable to climate imbalance to drive redefinitions regarding who has the legitimacy and ownership to define and solve the problem. As a methodological strategy, the text approaches Mary Robinson's accounts of the ability of populations exposed to human rights violations related to climate change to give visibility to the problem and, based on Nancy Fraser's three-dimensional theory of justice, verifies possibilities for the adoption of governance structures based on the recognition of climate injustices and the participation of those who convey them as inconvenient truths. The work is based on the deductive method and uses literature review as a research technique. It can be concluded that climate injustice, broadened conceptually, is capable of structuring more resilient governance models based on the inclusion and consultation of a more significant and plural number of stakeholders.