Making Unorganized Social Groups Responsible for Climate Change: Structural Analysis

Authors: Vojtěch Svěrák

Abstract:

Climate change ethics have recently shifted away from individualistic paradigms towards concepts of shared or collective responsibility. Despite this evolving trend, a noticeable gap remains: a lack of research exclusively addressing the moral responsibility of specific unorganized social groups. The primary objective of the article is to fill this gap. The article employs the structuralist methodological approach proposed by some feminist philosophers, utilizing structural analysis to explain the existence of social groups. The argument is made for the integration of this framework with the so-called forward-looking Social Connection Model (SCM) of responsibility, which ascribes responsibilities to individuals based on their participation in social structures. The article offers an extension of this model to justify the responsibility of unorganized social groups. The major finding of the study is that although members of unorganized groups are loosely connected, collectively they instantiate specific external social structures, share social positioning, and the notion of responsibility could be based on that. Specifically, if the structure produces harm or perpetuates injustices, and the group both benefits from and possesses the capacity to significantly influence the structure, a greater degree of responsibility should be attributed to the group as a whole. This thesis is applied and justified within the context of climate change, based on the asymmetrical positioning of different social groups. Climate change creates a triple inequality: in contribution, vulnerability, and mitigation. The study posits that different degrees of group responsibility could be drawn from these inequalities. Two social groups serve as a case study for the article: first, the Pakistan lower class, consisting of people living below the national poverty line, with a low greenhouse gas emissions rate, severe climate change-related vulnerability due to the lack of adaptation measures, and with very limited options to participate in the mitigation of climate change. Second, the so-called polluter elite, defined by members' investments in polluting companies and high-carbon lifestyles, thus with an interest in the continuation of structures leading to climate change. The first identified group cannot be held responsible for climate change, but their group interest lies in structural change and should be collectively maintained. On the other hand, the responsibility of the second identified group is significant and can be fulfilled by a justified demand for some political changes. The proposed approach of group responsibility is suggested to help navigate climate justice discourse and environmental policies, thus helping with the sustainability transition.

Keywords: collective responsibility, climate justice, climate change ethics, group responsibility, social ontology, structural analysis