Stuck in its straight jacket. How legal reasoning eludes intersectionality in the climate-health crisis
The current single-axis approach to climate change marginalizes individuals and groups who are burdened by multiple layers of gender, status, disability, territorial or geographical discrimination. This contribution argues that intersectional aspects of climate and health inequalities must be acknow...
Na minha lista:
| Publicado no: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/sextant, |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Idioma: | Anglais |
| Publicado em: |
Sextant
2025
|
| Assuntos: | |
| Acesso em linha: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Resumo: | The current single-axis approach to climate change marginalizes individuals and groups who are burdened by multiple layers of gender, status, disability, territorial or geographical discrimination. This contribution argues that intersectional aspects of climate and health inequalities must be acknowledged within legal reasoning. Through a multi-case study among climate change litigation, the paper scrutinizes and retraces intersectionality all along the judicial process, from lower to higher courts of United States, Switzerland, Colombia, and Canada. The illustrative analysis shows how intersectionality hardly enters the legal realm even though the global and social crises urgently require a new intellectual paradigm. Combining a feminist approach and legal expertise, it addresses how and questions why forty years of scholarship on intersectionality have not resulted in its absorption into judicial practices. The paper contributes to a broader claim that power relations must be recognized to address climate and health issues meaningfully. |
|---|