Justice Analysis for climate-related Films

The Justice Concept in Climate-related Films

Epistemic Justice can be understood as the recognition and valuing of diverse forms of knowledge and ways of understanding the world, especially in ensuring that the voices and wisdom from indigenous communities, local residents, and marginalised groups who often possess unique insights into environmental stewardship are included and validated in climate discussions and decision-making (Fricker, 2007).

It is without a doubt that films have the power to make transformative impact on people’s behaviour, attitudes and perceptions. However, epistemic (in)justice is often missing in climate-related films and within mainstream narratives. The heart of climate justice discourses is in questioning the current narratives of the climate crisis and critically analysing current representations of the issue and examining whose voices are included and who decides what stories are told (Green, 2023).

In the context of climate-related films, epistemic injustice is presented in the form of an epistemic condition in which marginalised groups like the indigenous communities, who possess in-depth knowledge and lived experience of the climate crises are unjustly discriminated against and have their voices continue to be misrepresented and excluded from and within climate narratives, suggesting that there is an unfair denial of knowledge occurring in films (Byskov, 2020). Epistemic injustice manifests in two primary ways – Testimonial and Hermeneutical injustice (Fricker, 2007, p1). Testimonial injustice occurs when certain voices or testimonies are not considered credible due to prejudices against the speaker’s socio-economic and cultural background while hermeneutical injustice arises when there is a lack of interpretive resources to allow marginalised groups from articulating and conveying their perspectives and experiences (Fricker, 2007, p1).

How the justice concept explains the sustainability issue in Films

In climate-centred films, testimonial epistemic injustice is seen through the overlooking of indigenous knowledge where technological advancements and government interventions are given more attention (Whyte, 2017) and the dominance of western-centric narratives which often simplify and marginalise the experiences of indigenous communities, and ultimately reducing their perspectives to mere symbols instead of substantive contributors to the climate action. In To Kill a Mockingbird, a black man is falsely convicted of assaulting a white woman in 1930s Alabama despite substantial evidence proving his innocence as the jurors were racially prejudiced and distrusted him (Cunliffe, 2019).

Besides informing, films also have the power to encourage conversations and dialogue in which hermeneutical epistemic injustice can be presented in feature films that emphasises the stories of the marginalised. Epistemic justice is therefore an invitation to strengthen the role of education towards decolonisation, an imperative in the sustainability discourse considering that education can contribute in the fight against discrimination and inequalities, and towards a truly intercultural society where harmony, inclusiveness and social justice is achieved (Schmelkes, 2023).

There are many disadvantages of epistemic injustice but perhaps the most concerning of all is the public's gradual loss of confidence in their ability to understand and possess knowledge. Over time, this lack of confidence can transcend into an inability to achieve one’s goals (Fricker, 2007, p.58), and inadvertently discouraging them from contributing to climate justice. If taken into consideration, epistemic justice can be considered as a new education paradigm which “recognises that education has favoured the transmission of predominantly western knowledge, generated in former colonising nations, that were and are imposed on a large part of humanity at the cost of the loss of knowledge and ways of knowing generated by Indigenous Peoples in colonised societies.” (Schmelkes, 2023) which can open rooms for discussions. Therefore, to address the epistemic injustice in climate-related firms and the broader environmental justice discussions, the film industry needs to acknowledge the valuable insights and contribution of frontline communities in the climate crisis.

593 words

References:

Byskov. M.F. 2020. What makes Epistemic injustice and “injustice”? Journal of Social Philosophy. [Online]. 52(1), pp.114-131. [Accessed 5 November 2024]. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/josp.12348

Cunliffe, Z. 2019. Narrative Fiction and Epistemic Injustice: Cunliffe. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. [Online]. 77(2), pp.169-180. [Accessed 6 November 2024]. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/jaac.12633

Fricker, M. 2007. Epistemic injustice: Power and the Ethics of knowing. [Online]. Oxford University Press. [Accessed 6 November 2024]. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198237907.001.0001

Green, D. 2023. Who decides what constitutes ‘Knowledge’ on Climate Change?. [Online]. [Accessed 5 November 2024]. Available from: https://frompoverty.oxfam.org.uk/who-decides-what-constitutes-knowledge-on-climate-change/

Schmelkes, S. 2023. Epistemic justice and the knowledge commons for lifelong and lifewide learning. [Online]. [Accessed 5 November 2024]. Available from:  https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/epistemic-justice-and-knowledge-commons-lifelong-and-lifewide-learning

Whyte, K.P. 2017. Indigenous Climate Change Studies: Indigenising Futures, Decolonising the Anthropocene. English Language Notes. [Online]. 55(1-2), pp.153-162. [Accessed 5 November 2024]. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00138282-55.1-2.153