A Comparative Study of Environmental Justice in the East and West: A Multi-Dimensional Analysis of Norms, Political Economy, and Governance

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Provides a comparative framework for studying the political and ethical dimensions of GX governance and standards-setting across different cultural contexts.

🏢実務担当者:Highlights the need for corporate sustainability strategies to address justice concerns in supply chain and ESG practices, particularly in cross-border operations.

🏛政策担当者:Offers insights into how equity principles can be integrated into carbon pricing, border mechanisms, and international climate agreements.

Against the backdrop of an accelerating global environmental crisis, the concept of "environmental justice" has evolved from a grassroots activist slogan into a central theme in international politics and public policy. However, a significant chasm persists between Eastern and Western societies in the conceptualization, attribution of responsibility, and policy implementation of environmental justice. This divergence is increasingly magnified in climate diplomacy, supply chain governance, and the politics of standards-setting. This article adopts a comparative perspective, integrating three analytical lenses—normative ethics, political economy, and governance institutions—to critically examine the tensions and potential compatibilities between the prevailing Western narrative of "historical responsibility and capability" and the East Asian, particularly Chinese, emphasis on the "right to development, stage-based differentiation, and state capacity." The analysis reveals that contemporary debates on environmental justice are not merely moral contests but are deeply enmeshed in the politics of emissions accounting (production vs. consumption), the systemic transfer of environmental costs through the global division of labor, the politicization of technology and standards, and the differential impacts of policy instruments such as ESG, carbon border mechanisms, and renewable energy transitions. The article concludes that transcending the East-West binary to forge a viable global environmental governance mechanism requires simultaneously addressing the legitimacy of responsibility allocation, the equitable distribution of transition costs, and the procedural rights of communities affected by these policies. Only by operationalizing the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" into tangible institutional arrangements can a sustainable and just global environmental future be achieved.

• Zenodo https://zenodo.org/records/20323129first seen 2026-05-22 04:17:42 · last seen 2026-05-24 04:13:06