Abstract
In May 2021, Royal Dutch Shell was ordered by the Hague District Court to significantly reduce its CO2 emissions. This ruling is unprecedented in that it attributes the responsibility for mitigating climate change directly to a specific corporate emitter. Shell neither directly causes climate change alone nor can alleviate it by itself; therefore, what grounds this responsibility attribution? I maintain that this question can be answered via Young’s social connection model of responsibility for justice. I defend two claims: First, I argue that the model explains Shell’s connection to climate change and that this relationship grounds Shell’s responsibility. Second, by identifying a way in which the social connection model could be applied to corporations in legal practice, I further develop Young’s model. I question Young’s distinction between political and legal responsibility for justice and propose that courts could mediate citizens’ actions regarding political responsibilities.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 550-569 |
| Number of pages | 20 |
| Journal | Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy (CRISPP) |
| Volume | 28 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| Early online date | 7 Sept 2022 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2025 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 13 Climate Action
Keywords
- Corporate responsibility
- Iris Marion Young
- responsibility for justice
- social connection model
- structural injustice
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Can business corporations be legally responsible for structural injustice? The social connection model in (legal) practice'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver