“I don't want a child”: an apolitical argument in climate change trials in Switzerland

IF 0.9 Q4 MANAGEMENT

Journal of Organizational Ethnography Pub Date : 2023-11-13 DOI:10.1108/joe-04-2023-0012

Clémence Demay, Mathilde Krähenbühl

{"title":"“I don't want a child”: an apolitical argument in climate change trials in Switzerland","authors":"Clémence Demay, Mathilde Krähenbühl","doi":"10.1108/joe-04-2023-0012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose This paper aims to explore how the argument of “eco-reproductive” concerns was mobilized in climate change trials in Switzerland. Looking at social movements' advantages and constraints when having recourse to the law, the authors interrogate why the symbolism of reproduction and kinship represented a political opportunity to defend the activists in a judicial system where judging is seen as an apolitical act. Design/methodology/approach This paper is grounded in legal research and research on social movements. While legal research focuses mainly on the study of legal and written sources, the authors used ethnography and conducted interviews to cross the perspectives of activists, their lawyers and judges. Findings In a context where positivist legal tradition remains strong, the “eco-reproductive” argument represented the advantage of being “apolitical,” thus audible in court. Used as socio-political tools, “eco-reproductive” concerns translated the activists' political claims into the legal arena. However, judges' conservative beliefs on family reinforced the depoliticization of activists' claims. Originality/value While research on “eco-reproductive” concerns has been significantly quantitative and exploratory, the authors look in depth at one case of application and highlight the limits of “eco-reproductive” concerns to appeal to decision-makers.","PeriodicalId":44924,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Organizational Ethnography","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Organizational Ethnography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/joe-04-2023-0012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to explore how the argument of “eco-reproductive” concerns was mobilized in climate change trials in Switzerland. Looking at social movements' advantages and constraints when having recourse to the law, the authors interrogate why the symbolism of reproduction and kinship represented a political opportunity to defend the activists in a judicial system where judging is seen as an apolitical act. Design/methodology/approach This paper is grounded in legal research and research on social movements. While legal research focuses mainly on the study of legal and written sources, the authors used ethnography and conducted interviews to cross the perspectives of activists, their lawyers and judges. Findings In a context where positivist legal tradition remains strong, the “eco-reproductive” argument represented the advantage of being “apolitical,” thus audible in court. Used as socio-political tools, “eco-reproductive” concerns translated the activists' political claims into the legal arena. However, judges' conservative beliefs on family reinforced the depoliticization of activists' claims. Originality/value While research on “eco-reproductive” concerns has been significantly quantitative and exploratory, the authors look in depth at one case of application and highlight the limits of “eco-reproductive” concerns to appeal to decision-makers.

查看原文本刊更多论文

“我不想要孩子”:瑞士气候变化审判中的一个非政治论点

本文旨在探讨在瑞士气候变化试验中如何动员“生态生殖”关注的论点。在考察社会运动在诉诸法律时的优势和限制时，作者质疑为什么生殖和亲属关系的象征意义代表了在司法系统中为活动家辩护的政治机会，在司法系统中，审判被视为一种非政治行为。本文以法律研究和社会运动研究为基础。虽然法律研究主要侧重于法律和书面资料的研究，但作者使用民族志并进行访谈，以跨越活动家，他们的律师和法官的观点。在实证主义法律传统仍然强大的背景下，“生态生殖”的论点代表了“非政治性”的优势，因此在法庭上可以听到。作为社会政治工具，“生态生殖”问题将活动家的政治主张转化为法律领域。然而，法官对家庭的保守信念加强了活动家主张的非政治化。虽然对“生态生殖”问题的研究具有显著的定量和探索性，但作者深入研究了一个应用案例，并强调了“生态生殖”问题对决策者的吸引力的局限性。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Organizational Ethnography MANAGEMENT-

CiteScore

1.90

自引率

37.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Organizational Ethnography (JOE) has been launched to provide an opportunity for scholars, from all social and management science disciplines, to publish over two issues: -high-quality articles from original ethnographic research that contribute to the current and future development of qualitative intellectual knowledge and understanding of the nature of public and private sector work, organization and management -review articles examining the history and development of the contribution of ethnography to qualitative research in social, organization and management studies -articles examining the intellectual, pedagogical and practical use-value of ethnography in organization and management research, management education and management practice, or which extend, critique or challenge past and current theoretical and empirical knowledge claims within one or more of these areas of interest -articles on ethnographically informed research relating to the concepts of organization and organizing in any other wider social and cultural contexts.