A plural justice frame strengthens rather than dilutes movement cohesion

Evidence

The argument here is that a more thorough definition of justice, one that encompasses the expressed concerns of environmental justice and other groups, can offer a workable frame. Distributional concerns, along with calls for recognition, participation, and the protection of the capabilities and functioning of communities can come together in a frame that can strengthen both the explanatory and mobilizing reach of the movement. This is the essence of Taylor’s important discussion of the environmental justice ‘frame’ (2000). Environmental justice now has a broad enough frame, or discourse, that adherents come from a variety of cultural and collective identities. Many individuals and groups recognize and support other collective identities within an extended framework of environmental justice. — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice, 604

Categorization

• XREF: Connects directly to the reader’s polyad concern: whether a broad EJ frame can hold across movements. — connects to: The 1999 Seattle WTO protests united ideologically diverse movements under plural justice — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice:…, 611; Unity across difference requires integrating, not absorbing, diverse positions — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice:…, 614; Movements grow powerful by fusing with other movements on shared agendas — Luke W. Cole and Sheila R. Foster, From the Ground Up: Environmental…, 719 (+2 more)
• QUESTION: Worth testing: does breadth of discourse actually predict coalition durability, or is that asserted? No empirical measure offered.

Broader Connections

• A shared justice vocabulary can unify environmental and ecological justice movements #corroborates (0.80) — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice, 41