Dienst van SURF
© 2025 SURF
The recent shift towards the interdisciplinary study of the human-environment relationship is largely driven by environmental justice debates. This article will distinguish four types of environmental justice and link them to questions of neoliberalism and altruism. First, environmental justice seeks to redress inequitable distribution of environmental burdens to vulnerable groups and economically disadvantaged populations. Second, environmental justice highlights the developed and developing countries’ unequal exposure to environmental risks and benefits. Third, temporal environmental justice refers to the issues associated with intergenerational justice or concern for future generations of humans. In all three cases, environmental justice entails equitable distribution of burdens and benefits to different nations or social groups. By contrast, ecological justice involves biospheric egalitarianism or justice between species. This article will focus on ecological justice since the rights of non-human species lags behind social justice debates and discuss the implications of including biospheric egalitarianism in environmental justice debates. https://doi.org/10.1186/2194-6434-1-8 https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
Social scientists of conservation typically address sources of legitimacy of conservation policies in relation to local communities’ or indigenous land rights, highlighting social inequality and environmental injustice. This chapter reflects on the underlying ethics of environmental justice in order to differentiate between various motivations of conservation and its critique. Conservation is discussed against the backdrop of two main ethical standpoints: preservation of natural resources for human use, and protection of nature for its own sake. These motivations will be examined highlighting mainstream conservation and alternative deep ecology environmentalism. Based on this examination, this chapter untangles concerns with social and ecological justice in order to determine how environmental and human values overlap, conflict, and where the opportunity for reconciliation lies, building bridges between supporters of social justice and conservation. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783319713113#aboutBook LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
Good collaboration between professional foster parents (PFPs) and birth parents (BPs) is of great importance for the well-being of out-of-home placed youngsters in family-style group care. Previous studies have shown that WhatsApp has become an important medium in the professional communication between professional foster parents and birth parents as it offers the possibility to send movies and photos in addition to text. This research has identified two ways in which professional foster parents are closing WhatsApp conversations in a sensitive manner. Professional foster parents are setting boundaries by encouraging and making a reference to the future, often accompanied by emoji: (1) Encouragements are apparent in expressions that compliment, comfort and invite to ‘let it go’. (2) Professional foster parents make reference to the future in a wish, proposal or promise. Furthermore, the asymmetrical nature of the relationship becomes clear in the coaching role adopted by professional foster parents, and the observation that solely professional foster parents at times remain silent or do not respond in closing interactions. In short, sensitive boundary setting in closing sequences demonstrates how the institutional character of the relationship is embodied in the WhatsApp communication between professional foster parents and birth parents.