CALQ
Social Justice and Development
Working Group 4
Mieke Vink
Adaption to climate change and social justice: challenges for flood and
disaster management in Thailand
Lebel, L., Foran, T., Garden, P., Manuta, J.B. (2007)
Core quotation
“Intervention in the name of climate change can create winners and losers. They can shift the distribution of
benefits or involuntary risks from one group to another. Adaption may even exacerbate injustice, as when actions
in the logic of protecting national assets and interests make some disadvantaged groups even more vulnerable
than they were before” (p.10).
Arguments
The authors state that inequalities among different groups in society can increase as a consequence of the current
approaches towards floods and changing flood regimes caused by climate change. This statement is formed
through literature based review of the current handling of flood disaster management in Thailand. The review of
the current approach is organised by five principle challenges to flood disaster management which relate to the
conventional disaster cycle. Sequentially discussed are; reducing risks of exposure, enhancing capacities to adapt,
securing the affected, maintaining resilience and strengthening links between knowledge and practice.
Overall, the investigation reveals a technical approach to climate change adaption and a neglect of
social justice. Moreover, the current adaption strategy does not only neglect issues of social justice, it aggravates
inequity and vulnerability. In the Thai context, it are merely business and tourist areas in the larger cities as well
as the gated communities of the rich being protected and helped first whilst the poor and vulnerable are being
left on their own suffering from the biggest risks and consequences. The diverse range of critiques exposed in
each of the five challenges, are mostly originated in four principle inequalities.
At first, growing inequality can be declared by the, unacknowledged, fact that different social groups
have different risks of exposure to floods. In the Thai policy, these differences are even being reinforced in a
situation where risks are being distributed. The areas of the richer and influential Thai are often protected by
water blocking systems whilst the neighbouring, poorer areas are the victims receiving even more water.
Secondly, the capacities of vulnerable people to participate in the policy making process towards reducing risks
are negligible which often leads extreme infrastructural solutions without proper investigation on side-effects.
Where the Thai government bases its policy on these extremities leading to bigger inequalities, the environment
as well civil society on the contrary, often appear capable of effective self-organized responses which is to a
large extent based on living with (changes in) flood regimes instead of preventing flooding.
Thirdly, policies are often discriminatory, worsening the position of disadvantaged. Vulnerable groups, like
coastal fishers, women and upland farmers, who are already carrying bigger risks and most badly hit are also
the ones being warned and helped last. As a fourth reason the authors refer to the constant tension in the Thai
context between people depending on floods for their livelihoods and groups willing to prevent the floods, often
leading to the neglect of the former.
To more fairly address challenges posed by changing flood regimes, the authors put forward the need
for new approaches in which social justice issues are a central concern. This includes amongst others; priority for
the poor and vulnerable, the building of social and ecological resilience, participation and the linkage of
knowledge and practice.
Links
The rising tide: assessing the risks of climate change and human settlements in low elevation coastal zones
(McGranahan) (lecture 6)
Discussing climate change in relation to lower coastal zones, this article closely relates to the main article of this
CALQ. Both articles acknowledge the risks of living in these areas and the different exposures to risks among
different groups. “The rising tide …” speaks about risk reduction in a more pragmatic way where the discussed
article is more ideologically and directly focussing on social justice. Both the articles mention the solution of
migrating out of vulnerable areas and both acknowledge the difficulties of this type of projects. The article about
Thailand, is putting this option quite fast to the side, taking the settlement in lower coastal zones as a fact, where
“The rising tide…” is going deeper into this option by extensive investigating of settlement within the lower
coastal zones to be able to judge the possibility of migration. McGranahan in his conclusion mentions the need for
international support for low-income countries where Lebel looks for internal solutions.
Questions
- The authors reject the idea of preventing floods from entering the human settlements, calling it an ‘overly
ambitious’ (p. 7). Looking at the Netherlands, it seems you cannot be ambitious enough. Would you agree with
the authors or do you think preventing is a realistic possibility?
- In Thailand there is a constant tension between people who are depending on the floods for their livelihoods
and people wanting to prevent the floods (p.6). There always seem to be a losing party. If there is one, what
would be a socially just solution in this situation?
- During the lecture, it became clear that the Thai have a culture of passivity and acceptance and not much
interest in the collective good and the broader future. Is opening spaces for vulnerable groups to participation, as
suggested by the authors an effective solution (short and/or long term)?