欧盟视角下的正义、性别和气候移民。探讨欧盟委员会、欧盟议会和理事会的不同作用。

Q4 Social Sciences
Francesca Rosignoli
{"title":"欧盟视角下的正义、性别和气候移民。探讨欧盟委员会、欧盟议会和理事会的不同作用。","authors":"Francesca Rosignoli","doi":"10.17345/rcda3622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Climate migration is an emerging policymaking area not yet regulated by European Law. Given the absence of a legally-binding treaty governing this phenomenon, the scope of this study focuses on policy documents issued by the most relevant European Institutions: the EU Commission, EU Parliament, and the Council. Thanks to this document-based analysis, the present contribution will show the different roles the selected EU institutions played and whether they have a common denominator. The main findings show that despite the different ontologies and approaches, the selected EU institutions seem to converge into a significant securitization of climate migration, with scant attention to gender and environmental justice within the most relevant EU documents concerning migration and asylum. Indeed, such perspectives are more likely to be mentioned in EU policy documents dedicated to gender but are not integrated into the migration policies where they would matter. A detailed analysis of the New Pact on Migration and Asylum reveals its substantially gender and environmental justice-blind approach despite the gender mainstreaming ontology that has been invoked in numerous policy documents largely focused on gender.","PeriodicalId":30258,"journal":{"name":"Revista Catalana de Dret Ambiental","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Justice, gender and climate migration in the eu perspective. Exploring different roles of the eu commission, EU parliament, and the council.\",\"authors\":\"Francesca Rosignoli\",\"doi\":\"10.17345/rcda3622\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Climate migration is an emerging policymaking area not yet regulated by European Law. Given the absence of a legally-binding treaty governing this phenomenon, the scope of this study focuses on policy documents issued by the most relevant European Institutions: the EU Commission, EU Parliament, and the Council. Thanks to this document-based analysis, the present contribution will show the different roles the selected EU institutions played and whether they have a common denominator. The main findings show that despite the different ontologies and approaches, the selected EU institutions seem to converge into a significant securitization of climate migration, with scant attention to gender and environmental justice within the most relevant EU documents concerning migration and asylum. Indeed, such perspectives are more likely to be mentioned in EU policy documents dedicated to gender but are not integrated into the migration policies where they would matter. A detailed analysis of the New Pact on Migration and Asylum reveals its substantially gender and environmental justice-blind approach despite the gender mainstreaming ontology that has been invoked in numerous policy documents largely focused on gender.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30258,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Catalana de Dret Ambiental\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Catalana de Dret Ambiental\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17345/rcda3622\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Catalana de Dret Ambiental","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17345/rcda3622","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

气候移民是一个新兴的政策制定领域,尚未受到欧洲法律的监管。鉴于没有一项具有法律约束力的条约来规范这一现象,本研究的范围集中在最相关的欧洲机构发布的政策文件上:欧盟委员会、欧盟议会和理事会。由于这份基于文件的分析,本报告将展示选定的欧盟机构所发挥的不同作用,以及它们是否有共同点。主要研究结果表明,尽管存在不同的本体论和方法,但选定的欧盟机构似乎趋同于气候移民的重大证券化,在最相关的欧盟移民和庇护文件中很少关注性别和环境正义。事实上,这些观点更有可能在欧盟专门讨论性别问题的政策文件中被提及,但在重要的移民政策中没有被纳入。对《移民和庇护新公约》的详细分析表明,尽管在许多主要侧重于性别问题的政策文件中援引了性别主流化本体论,但该公约在很大程度上忽视了性别和环境正义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Justice, gender and climate migration in the eu perspective. Exploring different roles of the eu commission, EU parliament, and the council.
Climate migration is an emerging policymaking area not yet regulated by European Law. Given the absence of a legally-binding treaty governing this phenomenon, the scope of this study focuses on policy documents issued by the most relevant European Institutions: the EU Commission, EU Parliament, and the Council. Thanks to this document-based analysis, the present contribution will show the different roles the selected EU institutions played and whether they have a common denominator. The main findings show that despite the different ontologies and approaches, the selected EU institutions seem to converge into a significant securitization of climate migration, with scant attention to gender and environmental justice within the most relevant EU documents concerning migration and asylum. Indeed, such perspectives are more likely to be mentioned in EU policy documents dedicated to gender but are not integrated into the migration policies where they would matter. A detailed analysis of the New Pact on Migration and Asylum reveals its substantially gender and environmental justice-blind approach despite the gender mainstreaming ontology that has been invoked in numerous policy documents largely focused on gender.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信