Suchergebnisse

To better understand injustice in our cities, and to understand how vulnerability to impacts of climate change is constructed, scholars have noted that we need to incorporate multiple factors that shape identity and power in our analyses, including race, class, gender, ethnicity and sexuality. Less widely acknowledged is the intersectionality of these factors; that specific combinations of factors shape their own social position and thus affect experiences of power, oppression and vulnerability. To address emerging issues like climate change, it is vital to find a way to understand and approach multiple, intersecting axes of identity that shape how impacts will be distributed and experienced. This article introduces intersectionality, a concept for understanding multiple, co-constituting axes of difference and identity, and kyriarchy, a theory of power that describes the power structures intersectionality produces, and offers researchers a fresh way of approaching the interactions of power in planning research and practice.

In this chapter, we explore ideas of human rights and environmental justice in Australian cities. We draw on three intersecting discourses of urban justice: the entangled, messy more-than-human theory, Indigenous political theories of justice and land rights, and the spatial politics of the right to the city. We bring together these bodies of work to interrogate relationships between people and cities, 'the environment' and human rights. We argue that these theories of justice enable us to disrupt the dominant liberal model of human rights, and muddle traditional legal understandings of what and where 'the environment' is and how it might be protected or sustained. We argue that meaningful conceptions of urban justice require lived recognition of our entanglements with place, people and the more-than-human. This recognition in turn might open up space for conceptions of urban justice beyond the contained, liberal subject imagined in human rights discourse and the contained, enclosed place imagined in colonial environmental law. ; Full Text

The sustainability concept in its current form suffers from reductionism. The common interpretation of 'meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs' fails to explicitly recognize their interdependence with needs of current and future non-human generations. Here, we argue that the focus of sustainability on human well-being – a purely utilitarian view of nature as a resource for humanity – limits its conceptual and analytical power, as well as real-world sustainability transformation efforts. We propose a broadened concept of 'multispecies sustainability' by acknowledging interdependent needs of multiple species' current and future generations. We develop the concept in three steps: (1) discussing normative aspects, fundamental principles underlying the con- cept, and potential visual models, (2) showcasing radically diverging futures emerging from a scenario thought experiment based on the axes sustainable-unsustainable and multispecies-anthropocentric, and (3) exploring how multispecies sustainability can be applied to research and policy-making through two case studies (a multispecies stakeholder framework and the Healthy Urban Microbiome Initiative).

The sustainability concept seeks to balance how present and future generations of humans meet their needs. But because nature is viewed only as a resource, sustainability fails to recognize that humans and other living beings depend on each other for their well-being. We therefore argue that true sustainability can only be achieved if the interdependent needs of all species of current and future generations are met, and propose calling this 'multispecies sustainability'. We explore the concept through visualizations and scenarios, then consider how it might be applied through case studies involving bees and healthy green spaces.