User:Dee envjus/sandbox

Latin America
The major agricultural products of Latin American regions include livestock and grains, such as maize, wheat, soybeans, and rice. Increased temperatures and altered hydrological cycles are predicted to translate to shorter growing seasons, overall reduced biomass production, and lower grain yields. Brazil, Mexico and Argentina alone contribute 70-90% of the total agricultural production in Latin America. In these and other dry regions, maize production is expected to decrease. A study summarizing a number of impact studies of climate change on agriculture in Latin America indicated that wheat is expected to decrease in Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay. Livestock, which is the main agricultural product for parts of Argentina, Uruguay, southern Brazil, Venezuela, and Colombia is likely to be reduced. Variability in the degree of production decrease among different regions of Latin America is likely. For example, one study that estimated future maize production in Latin America predicted that by 2055 maize in eastern Brazil will have moderate changes while Venezuela is expected to have drastic decreases.

Suggested potential adaptation strategies to mitigate the impacts of global warming on agriculture in Latin America include using plant breeding technologies and installing irrigation infrastructure.

Climate justice and subsistence farmers in Latin America
Several studies that investigated the impacts of climate change on agriculture in Latin America suggest that in the poorer countries of Latin America, agriculture composes the most important economic sector and the primary form of sustenance for small farmers. Maize is the only grain still produced as a sustenance crop on small farms in Latin American nations. Scholars argue that the projected decrease of this grain and other crops will threaten the welfare and the economic development of subsistence communities in Latin America. Food security is of particular concern to rural areas that have weak or non-existent food markets to rely on in the case food shortages.

According to scholars who considered the environmental justice implications of climate change, the expected impacts of climate change on subsistence farmers in Latin America and other developing regions are unjust for two reasons .First, subsistence farmers in developing countries, including those in Latin America are disproportionately vulnerable to climate change Second, these nations were the least responsible for causing the problem of anthropogenic induced climate.

According to researchers John F. Morton and T. Roberts, disproportionate vulnerability to climate disasters is socially determined. For example, socioeconomic and policy trends affecting smallholder and subsistence farmers limit their capacity to adapt to change. According to W. Baethgen who studied the vulnerability of Latin American agriculture to climate change, a history of policies and economic dynamics has negatively impacted rural farmers. During the 1950s and through the 1980s, high inflation and appreciated real exchange rates reduced the value of agricultural exports. As a result, farmers in Latin America received lower prices for their products compared to world market prices. Following these outcomes, Latin American policies and national crop programs aimed to stimulate agricultural intensification. These national crop programs benefitted larger commercial farmers more. In the 1980s and 1990s low world market prices for cereals and livestock resulted in decreased agricultural growth and increased rural poverty.

In the book, Fairness in Adaptation to Climate Change, the authors describe the global injustice of climate change between the rich nations of the north, who are the most responsible for global warming and the southern poor countries and minority populations within those countries who are most vulnerable to climate change impacts.

Adaptive planning is challenged by the difficulty of predicting local scale climate change impacts. An expert that considered opportunities for climate change adaptation for rural communities argues that a crucial component to adaptation should include government efforts to lessen the effects of food shortages and famines. This researcher also claims that planning for equitable adaptation and agricultural sustainability will require the engagement of farmers in decision making processes.

Inundation, displacement, and national sovereignty of small islands
According to scholar Tsosie, environmental disparities among disadvantaged communities including poor and racial minorities, extend to global inequalities between the developed and developing countries. For example, according to Barnett, J. and Adger, W.N. the projected damage to small islands and atoll communities will be a consequence of climate change caused by developing countries that will disproportionately affect these developing nations.

Sea-level rise and increased tropical cyclones are expected to place low-lying small islands in the Pacific, Indian, and Caribbean regions at risk of inundation and population displacement. .

According to N. Mimura's study on the vulnerability of island countries in the South Pacific to sea level rise and climate change, financially burdened island populations living in the lowest-lying regions are most vulnerable to risks of inundation and displacement. On the islands of Fiji, Tonga and western Samoa for example, high concentrations of migrants that have moved from outer islands inhabit low and unsafe areas along the coasts.

Atoll nations, which include countries that are entirely comprised of the smallest form of islands called motus, are at risk of entire population displacement. These nations include Kiribati, Maldives, the Marshall Islands, Tokelau, and Tuvalu. According to a study on climate dangers to atoll countries, characteristics of atoll islands that make them vulnerable to sea level rise and other climate change impacts include their small size, their isolation from other land, their low income resources, and their lack of protective infrastructure.

A study that engaged the experiences of residents in atoll communities found that the cultural identities of these populations are strongly tied to these lands. The risk of losing these lands therefore threatens the national sovereignty, or right to self-determination, of Atoll nations. Human rights activists argue that the potential loss of entire atoll countries, and consequently the loss of cultures and indigenous lifeways cannot be compensated with financial means. Some researchers suggest that the focus of international dialogues on these issues should shift from ways to relocate entire communities to strategies that instead allow for these communities to remain on their lands.

Environmental justice and climate change vulnerability
Robert Bullard, one of the early environmental justice activist, described environmental justice as the idea that “all people and communities are entitled to equal protection of environmental and public health laws and regulations.” Billard established that in addition to the physical and natural world, the environment included the spaces where people lived, worked, played, and went to school. According to the book, A Twenty First Century U.S. Policy, and the IPCC 2013 Summary for Policymakers report, climate change will bring about new forms of environmental hazards which are predicted to include increased flooding, water scarcity, and sea-level rise, among others.

In A Twenty First Century U.S. Policy, the authors argue that the ability of populations to mitigate and adapt to the negative impacts of climate change are influenced by factors such as income, race, class, gender, capital and political representation among other social factors. According to the same authors and Mohai, P. et al, as a result of the limited adaptive resources that low-income communities and communities of color are likely to have, these populations are particularly vulnerable to the predicted impacts of climate change. The authors of A Twenty First Century U.S. Policy, also indicate that low-income people and people of color, who have lower financial stability, less insurance resources, and less access to disaster risk awareness have been least abled to recover from environmental disasters. Additionally these populations have been prone to unequal distributions of disaster relief and recovery assistance.

Hurricane Katrina case study


According to one study which considered the environmental justice dimensions of climate change, the outcomes of Hurricane Katrina presented insights to outcomes of predicted climate change disasters. According to the authors of the book, A Twenty First Century U.S. Water Policy, the impacts of Hurricane Katrina, which involved the displacement of 400,000 individuals along the United States Gulf Coast, disproportionately affected low-income and minority victims of the disaster. A study looking at the race and class dimensions of Hurricane Katrina suggest that individuals most vulnerable to the disaster included poor, black, brown, elderly, sick, and homeless people.

The book A Twenty First Century U.S. Water Policy argues that a combination of geographic, social and political factors resulted in the disproportionate impact of the hurricane on low-income communities and black communities. For example, low- income communities and black communities had little resources and limited mobility to evacuate before the storm. . In the aftermath of the hurricane, low- income communities and communities of color in Louisiana were burdened by the hazards of flooding waters that were polluted by contaminated sites and facilities that were located near these communities. Two studies looking at the environmental justice aspects of Hurricane Katrina argue that post disaster, government responses failed to adequately assist the most affected. Scholars Elliott, J. and Pais, J. claim that among some of these most impacted included those who had no flooding insurance, those who suffered from low job security, and the low-income homeowners which dealt with mortgage foreclosures.

A number of research reports claim that the outcomes of Hurricane Katrina presented opportunities for revealing novel instances and causes of environmental injustices. These include the inequitable aspects of city planning and development which result in increased risks of natural disasters and disproportionate impacts on some populations.