In the explanations of the three forms of justices above, some of the relationships between the three theories have been highlighted. The ideas of justice in Marx’s thoughts, environmental justice and social justice are connected in their conceptualization as they portray and adhere to objective views of justice. Marx’s view of justice is perfectly tied to the ideas of social justice which in turn tally with environmental justice. Hence, when environmental justice is linked to social justice, it also covers Marx’s view of justice.
46
Agyeman (1978:232-236) explained that due to inequalities in the distribution of environmental benefits and damages, which affects mostly the poor and marginalized, it is impossible to sideline environmental issues from social and economic issues; they are inseparable (Agyeman 1978:235). This is because environmental issues always lead to the emergence of human rights and environmental organizations which hold a joint concern for environmental and social justice. This is evident in Brazil where the Green Environmental Movements “jointly campaign for the rights of indigenous forest dwellers and against commercial deforestation” (Agyeman 1978).Likewise, the dumping of nuclear waste in Benin has also caused the emergence of human rights and environmental organizations that focus on social and environmental justice. So also the proposed hydraulic fracturing in the Midlands has caused the emergence and mobilization of environmental organizations and human rights activism. These explanations, shows that the three forms of justices are linked together as they all concern human rights, social and environmental justice and they all disapprove of economic exploitation of environmental resources which Marx advances in his Critique of Capitalism (Regan 2012:1-29).
Capek (1993) highlighted that social justice must be included in issues of the environment and green campaigns for everyone to claim their social rights on the environment. Thus, social justice and environmental justice emphasize the rights to:
(a) accurate information about situations (b) a prompt, respectful and unbiased hearing when contamination claims are made (c) democratic participation in deciding the future of the contaminated community (d) compensation from parties who have inflicted injuries on victims (e) elimination of environmental racism (Capek 1993:8).
These rights are what the three forms of justices in this research advocates for and these are also the same rights sought for by the environmental social movement organizations examined in this study. In a vivid way, this captures the connection between the theories in this research.
Following the conceptualization of the three forms of justices above, we are enlightened to see that all three justices are directed to states and institutions in the society to implement policies that bring justice to everyone (Rawls 1971; Premdas 2016; Miller 1999; Jansson 2005). Young (1990b) captured this by positing that “a just society is one that facilitates the development and exercise of persons’ capacities and expression of their experience, a just
47
society that provide opportunities for persons to participate in decisions that shape their lives”. Young (1990b) also argued that social justice, Marx’s view on justice and proponents of environmental justice move above the distribution and redistribution of societal goods to democratize institutions and states by challenging policies and structures of marginalization and also to assert the recognition of human rights and cultural identities. This means that the three justices foster justice and fairness in all aspects of the state and institutions.
Environmental hazardous impacts on the environment and the people also lead to environmental, social and economic issues such as land/resource exploitation, pollution and health issues. This point to the fact that human negative impacts on the environment affects the environment and exposes humans to environmental, social and economic danger. This implies that the three forms of justices explained in this chapter centers on humans (the people).The three concepts advance the development and betterment of the human person (Beltran, Hacker and Begun 2016:493-502). So this implies that the harmful effects of humans on the environment can as well lead to environmental, social and economic effects.
For example, if fracking is allowed on the environment, it can be argued that the chemicals will contaminate underground water and this will result to environmental, health, economic and social effects. Hence, due to these negative impacts of fracking mentioned in chapter two, social justice, Marx view on justice and environmental justice can be employed by the environmental organizations examined in this research to address these environmental issues that would become social and economic issues. This shows that social justice and Marx’s view on justice does not only address economic, social and political issues but can also be employed along with environmental justice to tackle environmental issues (Kasperson and Kasperson 2001; Bolan 1994; Beltran, Hacker and Begun 2016).
Another relationship between the three forms of justices is that they are transnational concepts of justice. This means that they are not specific or focused on a particular region or country but they can be used in any region or country (Salazar and Alper 2011:767-784). This is seen as the environmental organizations and human rights activists in New York, Pennsylvania, Germany and South Africa all employ the concepts of social justice, environmental justice and Marx’s view on justice to stop fracking in their various countries.
Social justice and Marx’s view on justice stand on three kinds of justice, (a) the distribution of societal benefits and burdens (distributive justice), (b) the assertion of right to participate
48
in public decisions (participative justice), and (c) the demand for public acknowledgment and compensation of affected groups (recognition justice). In the same way, environmental justice also stands on these three kinds of justice. Environmental justice (a) seeks for a redistribution of environmental benefits and burdens (same as distributive justice), (b) environmental justice demand access to decision making processes on the environment (same as participative justice) and (c) environmental justice calls for recognition and compensation of environmental affected group (same as recognition justice). Following this line of thought, it is seen that the three justices are tacitly related and connected (Gilbert 2004:245-260; Pulido 1996:142-158; Schlosberg 2003; Salazar and Alper 2011). In the same way, it could be deduced that the mobilization by the environmental organizations against the proposed fracking in the Midlands as examined in this research, is based on these three kinds of justices. Thus, social movement organizations, specifically environmental organizations seek for proper distribution of land and its resources; they demand for participatory processes in decision making on the environment and they call for recognition and compensation of those affected by environmental hazards.