The evolution of climate justice claims in global climate change negotiations under the UNFCCC

A growing body of research suggests that the global conception of climate change is increasingly taking a justice-focus. However, the justice-framings of different actors in the UNFCCC process and their evolution have not yet been examined. We conduct a critical discourse analysis of climate justice claims of state and non-state actors in COP15, COP19, COP21 and COP24 which are key moments for climate justice under the UNFCCC. Our findings indicate that the UNFCCC has not delivered on climate justice, power stands out as a key issue in the negotiations, and the negotiations reproduce structures of climate injustice. We identified four new country groupings with different climate justice frames. The Radicals consider climate change an imminent threat, while Opportunists seek to benefit from it. The Hypocrites recognize their contribution to climate change but avoid responsibility through libertarian mechanisms. The Evaders construe justice a normative issue and block others' justice claims. These groupings help discern how justice framings have evolved and how they are used in strategic ways to advance interests in multilateral forums.