EJ activism shifts from facility opposition to contesting decision-making legitimacy

Evidence

Simply put, equity is not the only issue of justice addressed by various groups and movements identifying with, and articulating, a call for environmental justice. Other fundamental critiques apparent in the literature of global movements invoking environmental justice include the relationship between social, cultural, and ecological misrecognition and community devastation, the lack of democratic participation in the construction and ongoing processes of governing institutions, and the debilitation of many individual and community capacities necessary for healthy functioning. — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice, 298 (#expands, via linked claim)

Neither legitimacy nor physical force arises without the mediation of symbolic processes. The concepts characterize neither a simple opposition nor the dual poles of a single dimension, such that one might say: the more physical force, the less legitimacy, and vice versa. Rather, symbolic interdependencies exist in the sense that regulations of the relationship at the symbiotic level – i.e. at the organic side of social co-existence – have to reckon with the requirements of the relevant communication medium. The interplay of both is necessary for the processing of contingencies, and the preconditions for this combined action can vary as they evolve. Above all they depend on the differentiation of a specifically political power mechanism and on its universal accessibility throughout society. — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 718 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Reliance on litigation atrophied the community group’s own organizing; Environmental law achieves reform by attacking procedure, not substance or outcome; EJ groups succeed by building power outside formal decision-making structures (+6 more)

Related

• Global environmental justice movements target misrecognition, exclusion, and incapacity alongside inequity (similarity 0.85)
• EJ recognition demands are inseparable from participation and self-determination (similarity 0.82)
• Global EJ movements frame collectives rather than individuals as justice subjects (similarity 0.80)
• Environmental justice groups organize already-existing communities that insist on recognition (similarity 0.80)
• Environmental justice groups pursue community functioning beyond distributional equality (similarity 0.79)
• Misrecognition of identities drives environmental justice groups to demand recognition. (similarity 0.79)
• Justice dimensions are inseparable and mutually reinforcing, not competing alternatives. (similarity 0.79)
• EJ advocates lack the power base to win without fusing movements (similarity 0.78)
• Movement definitions of justice often extend past distributive accounts (similarity 0.78)
• Justice theory must extend capabilities to groups, not just individuals (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Global environmental justice movements target misrecognition, exclusion, and incapacity alongside inequity #expands (0.85) — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice, 298
• EJ groups succeed by building power outside formal decision-making structures #complicates (0.80)
• Legitimacy and force co-vary through symbolic mediation, not inverse proportion #corroborates (0.80) — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 718
• EJ recognition demands are inseparable from participation and self-determination #expands (0.78) — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice, 237
• Deliberative legitimacy requires considerations neutral across interest groups #complicates (0.75) — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 854
• EJ advocates lack the power base to win without fusing movements #qualifies (0.72)
• Free spaces let ordinary people become participants in governing decisions #expands (0.72)