Climate change and justice: Exploring justice discourses in the climate change debate in Peru

Concern for justice or equity is one of the fundamental issues when discussing international climate policy. The quest for justice rises from the fact that although the developed countries are largely responsible for climate change, it is the developing countries and especially poor people inside these countries who are most likely to suffer from its adverse effects. Though the principle of justice is often mentioned in the climate change debate, it is not always clearly defined. This study draws on approaches to justice within the more general literature in International Relations. I will closely examine the concept and analyze how it is perceived in the climate change debate in Peru. Peru is an example of a developing country with low emissions on the global level but that is extremely vulnerable to climate change. The research is based on interviews that were conducted in Peru in March and April of 2009 according to the general interview guide approach. I interviewed people from different sectors working for the government, non-governmental organizations, academic and international organizations. The manner in which justice is defined happens largely through language. My method for analyzing the interviews is discourse analysis. I will investigate how the perception of justice is discursively constructed in the interviews and what shapes these distinct justice concerns. Moreover, I want to examine who should do what, at whose cost and when. The most important results of this research are the interpretations of the discourses and the perception of justice as based on these. The discourse of responsibility highlights the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities. This is seen as the most important principle when confronting climate change. The discourse of responsibility is the founding premise of the three other discourses: the discourse of national interests, the discourse of global benefits and the discourse of development. The analysis shows that the perception of justice in the climate change debate in Peru is based on the causal responsibility approach; it is perceived in the sense of righting the wrong. The premise is the responsibility of the developed countries for having caused the problem of climate change and for having harmed the others. Consequently, they have a moral responsibility to address the situation. This is the main factor that shapes the justice concept in Peru. Interdependence is seen as central to the understanding of justice; justice is seen as a transboundary concept. The developed countries need to reduce their emissions and also pay for the harm produced in the developing countries by giving them technological and financial support. For Peru adaptation is a priority and mitigation should be voluntary for the country. Acknowledgement of Peru’s right to development is important and the country needs support from the developed countries both for adaptation and mitigation. Asiasanat:ilmastonmuutos, Peru, oikeudenmukaisuus, haastattelututkimus, diskurssianalyysi