Climate Change Inequities: Addressing the Disproportionate Burden on Marginalised Communities and the Role of Climate Justice in Policy Frameworks

Dr. Ayesha Rahman¹, Dr. Kamran Siddiqui², Dr. Leila Hussain³, Dr. Omar Khalid⁴, Dr. Mariam Javed⁵

¹ Department of Environmental Policy, University of Lahore, Pakistan
² Centre for Climate Research, Punjab Agricultural University, Pakistan
³ School of Social Sciences, Quaid-i-Azam University, Pakistan

⁴ Institute of Public Policy, Government College University, Lahore, Pakistan

⁵ Department of Sustainable Development, COMSATS University, Islamabad, Pakistan

Correspondence

Correspondence to: Dr. Ayesha Rahman, Department of Environmental Policy, University of Lahore, Lahore, Pakistan
Email: [email protected]

Abstract

This research explores how climate change disproportionately affects marginalised populations and evaluates the significance of climate justice in shaping effective policy responses. Employing a quantitative approach, data were gathered from 150 participants, including government representatives, NGO professionals, and researchers in Punjab, Pakistan. A structured questionnaire was used to collect data, which were then analysed through correlation, regression, and T-test techniques. Findings indicate that vulnerable groups particularly low-income households, resource-poor individuals, and those residing in high-risk areas experience heightened socio-economic challenges due to climate change. The integration of climate justice principles into policy design was shown to strengthen adaptation strategies. Additionally, T-test results revealed notable differences in perceptions of climate change severity: NGO practitioners considered the impacts more critical compared to government officials. These outcomes emphasise the urgency for inclusive, localised policies that foreground the needs of disadvantaged populations. The study concludes that embedding climate justice into climate policy frameworks can reduce inequalities in impact distribution and enhance the overall effectiveness of adaptation measures.

Keywords:

Climate justice, Marginalised groups, Climate change adaptation, Policy-making, Socio-economic vulnerability.

© The Author(s) 2025. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third-party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

INTRODUCTION

Climate change stands as one of the defining global challenges of the 21st century, with repercussions felt across every region. Yet its impacts are not distributed evenly. While rising global temperatures, extreme weather events, and shifting ecosystems affect all, marginalised groups face a disproportionate share of these burdens. Vulnerable populations—such as low-income households, Indigenous peoples, women, racial minorities, and communities in developing nations—experience more severe consequences due to historical, social, and economic inequalities (Huq et al., 2017; Adger et al., 2006). These groups often have limited adaptive capacity, reduced influence in political processes, and live in climate-sensitive regions prone to disasters like floods, droughts, and storms (Pelling & High, 2005).

The framework of climate justice has emerged to address these inequalities. It argues that communities least responsible for climate change should not shoulder its harshest consequences. At its core, climate justice demands a fairer allocation of both the costs and benefits of mitigation and adaptation strategies. Historical injustices, including legacies of colonialism and industrialisation, have significantly contributed to the climate crisis, while leaving vulnerable populations with minimal resilience to cope with its effects (Roberts et al., 2012). Climate justice in policymaking therefore emphasises amplifying the voices of those most affected and ensuring that solutions confront inequities. However, while widely discussed in academic and activist spaces, climate justice has been only partially integrated into formal climate policies. Technical and economic solutions, often advanced by governments and international organisations, tend to overlook the social dimensions of climate impacts, leaving marginalised groups at the periphery of decision-making.

This study examines the unequal effects of climate change on disadvantaged groups and critically evaluates the role of climate justice in shaping climate governance at both local and international levels (Parks et al., 2013). Systemic inequalities intensify the risks for communities, especially in the Global South, where those contributing least to greenhouse gas emissions face the gravest disruptions. Factors such as poverty, fragile governance, inadequate infrastructure, and high population density in climate-sensitive regions amplify vulnerability (Shaw et al., 2015). Similarly, marginalised populations in wealthier nations—racial minorities, women, and low-income urban residents—are disproportionately exposed to environmental hazards like heatwaves, flooding, or industrial pollution, yet often lack the political or economic resources to adapt (Füssel, 2012).

As climate change continues to worsen existing social and economic disparities, climate justice has gained traction in scholarly and policy discussions. It highlights unequal contributions to the crisis and underscores moral obligations for those who have historically benefited from carbon-intensive growth to assume greater responsibility for mitigation (Roberts & Parks, 2007). Equally important, climate justice insists on inclusive decision-making processes, ensuring the participation of vulnerable groups in designing adaptation strategies (Schlosberg, 2013). Rooted in the idea that social justice is integral to environmental sustainability, climate justice challenges traditional climate policy models that rely heavily on technological and economic approaches while neglecting ethical and social dimensions. By questioning the assumption of equal adaptive capacity, it exposes how power imbalances, social structures, and historical contexts shape vulnerability (Anguelovski et al., 2018).

Introducing climate justice into climate policy requires a paradigm shift toward equity, fairness, and human rights alongside environmental goals. Adaptation measures should prioritise the needs and perspectives of vulnerable populations, enabling access to resources, technology, and opportunities to build resilience. Given the limited financial and institutional capacity in many regions, particularly in the Global South, international support in the form of funding and capacity building remains critical. Although mechanisms for loss and damage and financial assistance have been discussed in international agreements, their translation into equitable outcomes remains vague (Klein et al., 2017).

1.1 Marginalised Groups

Marginalised populations are those facing social, economic, or political disadvantages due to factors such as income, race, ethnicity, gender, disability, or location. This includes low-income communities, racial minorities, Indigenous groups, women, and people in developing countries. Their heightened vulnerability to climate impacts stems from systemic inequities, historic injustices, and insufficient adaptive resources. Communities in flood-prone areas or informal settlements face frequent displacement risks during climate-related disasters, while Indigenous groups dependent on natural resources are increasingly threatened by environmental disruptions (Chang et al., 2020).

1.2 Climate Change Effects

The second critical variable concerns the impacts of climate change, which encompass rising global temperatures, intensifying weather extremes, sea-level rise, and ecosystem disruptions. Marginalised groups, constrained by limited adaptive capacity, weak infrastructure, and inadequate access to healthcare, education, and technology, bear the heaviest burdens. Consequences include livelihood loss, food insecurity, and health crises in rural, low-income areas. Coping and recovery often depend on both the frequency and severity of climate shocks (Dunn et al., 1993).

1.3 Climate Justice

Climate justice serves as the central framework of this study. It highlights the uneven distribution of climate impacts and advocates for fairness in mitigation, adaptation, and resource allocation. The framework emphasises that vulnerable populations must not be excluded from climate responses. This variable assesses the extent to which climate justice principles are integrated into local and global policies and whether such policies equitably distribute resources and authority (Block et al., 2014).

1.4 Climate Policy & Governance

Climate policy and governance are essential for operationalising climate justice. They involve the legal, institutional, and regulatory frameworks—at national and international levels—aimed at addressing climate change. These include adaptation strategies, disaster risk management, emissions reductions, and financial support mechanisms. This study investigates how these policies are designed, the role marginalised communities play in shaping them, and whether their needs are incorporated into decision-making. It also considers the alignment of governance frameworks with global agreements such as the Paris Agreement (Sissoko, 2010).

1.5 Research Objectives The main research objectives are;

• To investigate the disproportionate impacts of climate change on marginalised groups.
• To evaluate the integration of climate justice in current policymaking.
• To assess the effectiveness of climate justice frameworks in advancing equity.

1.6 Problem Statement

Although marginalised groups contribute least to global climate change, they endure its harshest impacts. Low-income populations, Indigenous peoples, and racial minorities often lack the resources and capacity to adapt effectively. Current policies, shaped without sufficient attention to group differences, risk being unresponsive to vulnerable populations. This study aims to identify gaps in climate policy and propose equitable approaches to address environmental and social injustices.

1.7 Significance of the Study

This research underscores the urgency of developing climate policies that directly address the unequal impacts on marginalised groups. By situating climate justice at the center of policymaking, the study contributes to debates on how frameworks can be reshaped to safeguard vulnerable communities. The research emphasises the importance of inclusive approaches that go beyond environmental damage to incorporate social justice, resilience-building, and the protection of those most affected by climate change.

Literature Review

2.1 Introducing Climate Change and Marginalised Populations

Although climate change affects all regions worldwide, its impacts are not equally distributed. The most vulnerable and disadvantaged groups bear the greatest risks, including extreme weather events, rising sea levels, droughts, floods, and negative health outcomes. Marginalised populations—such as low-income households, racial and ethnic minorities, Indigenous peoples, women, children, and the elderly—are more exposed to climate threats and possess fewer resources to adapt (Huq, 2016; Adger et al., 2006). These groups frequently live in high-risk areas, often lack adequate infrastructure, and have limited access to healthcare, education, and decision-making forums, all of which intensify their vulnerability to climate-related shocks. For example, in the Global South and poorer urban zones of developed countries, informal settlements are typically located in flood-prone or landslide-prone areas, leaving residents unable to relocate or rebuild after disasters (Shaw et al., 2017).

Climate change exacerbates entrenched inequalities rooted in colonisation, systemic racism, and gender discrimination. Thus, the vulnerability of marginalised groups stems not only from exposure to environmental risks but also from inadequate adaptive capacity constrained by social and economic disadvantages (Pelling & High, 2005). This heightened vulnerability has underscored the need for equitable and inclusive policies that protect disadvantaged groups in the face of accelerating climate impacts.

2.2 Climate Justice: Concept and Framework

The concept of climate justice arises from the uneven distribution of climate change’s consequences, emphasising both environmental and social dimensions. It argues that communities least responsible for the crisis—low-income groups, Indigenous peoples, and developing nations—should not disproportionately suffer from its effects. Instead, these groups deserve adequate support and compensation to mitigate risks and adapt to climate disruptions (Brown et al., 2017). Climate justice advocates for fairness in distributing both the benefits and responsibilities of climate mitigation, adaptation, and finance.

Principles of climate justice include equity, participation, and the recognition of human rights, particularly the right to a healthy environment and involvement in decision-making processes that affect vulnerable communities (Schlosberg, 2016). The Paris Agreement, for example, enshrines the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities,” recognising that developed nations bear greater obligations due to their historical contributions to greenhouse gas emissions. Similarly, the principle of “loss and damage” calls for financial aid to vulnerable countries facing irreversible harms such as displacement or biodiversity loss (Klein et al., 2024).

However, despite growing recognition of climate justice, most climate policies remain inadequate in addressing structural inequalities. Critics argue that global climate action often sidelines marginalised voices, prioritising economic growth, technological innovation, and the interests of developed nations (Anguelovski et al., 2016). This underscores the need to incorporate social and political considerations into climate strategies to ensure inclusivity.

2.3 Uneven Impact of Climate Change on the Vulnerable Groups

Extensive literature highlights the disproportionate burdens of climate change on marginalised populations. Factors such as geographic location, socio-economic status, and resource constraints exacerbate their risks. Indigenous communities dependent on land-based livelihoods face displacement due to sea-level rise, ecosystem degradation, and deforestation (Huq, 2016). Women in developing countries are similarly vulnerable, as climate disruptions affect water collection, subsistence farming, and caregiving responsibilities—tasks predominantly assigned to them (Kemp, 2005).

Racial and ethnic minorities in both the Global South and North often reside in environmentally hazardous areas, such as flood zones or near industrial facilities, where pollution and climate risks intersect. These groups also have limited access to healthcare, affordable housing, and disaster relief, further constraining their ability to adapt (Füssel, 2009). Pelling & High (2005) stress that exclusion from planning processes compounds their vulnerability. Moreover, climate impacts frequently intersect with other forms of exclusion, such as poverty, disability, or gender inequality. For example, persons with disabilities face amplified risks during extreme weather events due to inadequate infrastructure and limited social support (Cohen et al., 2016). Policies must therefore adopt an intersectional approach to address the multiple, overlapping vulnerabilities marginalised groups experience.

2.4 Climate Policy Challenges

Despite advances in climate justice discourse, most national and international policies fail to adequately address the needs of marginalised groups. Global frameworks often prioritise emissions reductions and technological progress while neglecting the social mechanisms that perpetuate inequality. This narrow focus limits the effectiveness of climate action in reducing vulnerabilities.

Although the Paris Agreement recognises adaptation funding and compensation for vulnerable nations, concerns remain regarding whether financial commitments translate into tangible support for marginalised communities. Klein et al. (2017) argue that international agreements make ambitious promises, but evidence of equitable resource distribution at the local level remains scarce. Furthermore, global negotiations often prioritise high-level political agendas while overlooking the specific needs of vulnerable groups (Anguelovski et al., 2016).

At the local scale, marginalised communities frequently remain excluded from governance and policymaking, with top-down approaches leaving their concerns unaddressed. Inclusive governance structures are essential to designing climate policies that are responsive to the unique needs of disadvantaged populations (Schlosberg, 2017).

2.5 Research Gaps

While scholarship has increasingly emphasised the importance of climate justice, significant gaps remain in integrating these principles into policymaking. Research on the intersection of climate change and social justice is expanding, yet further investigation is needed into how climate justice frameworks can influence both local and international governance structures. This study contributes to filling this gap by examining how climate justice is applied in policymaking and exploring strategies for more inclusive, equitable climate action.

2.6 Hypothesis of the study

Based on the literature, the study is guided by the following hypotheses:

• H1: Marginalised groups experience disproportionately severe impacts from climate change due to resource constraints, geographic exposure, and socio-economic disadvantage.
• H2: Climate justice principles are insufficiently integrated into current climate policies, leading to inadequate protection and support for vulnerable populations.
• H3: The effectiveness of climate justice frameworks is limited by the lack of representation and participation of marginalised groups in policymaking processes.

Methodology

3.1 Research Design

This study adopted a quantitative research design to examine the disproportionate effects of climate change on vulnerable groups and to explore the role of climate justice in policy-making. The design enabled the collection of numerical data that were statistically analysed to identify patterns and relationships among variables. This approach was selected because it ensures objectivity and allows findings to be generalised through statistical testing.

3.2 Population

The study population consisted of government officials from Punjab and members of NGOs engaged in climate policy, climate justice advocacy, or climate change adaptation initiatives. These groups were chosen because of their direct or indirect involvement in shaping climate-related policies and protecting marginalised communities, providing critical insights into the existing policy landscape.

3.3 Target Audience

A total of 150 respondents were selected, comprising a mix of Punjab government officials, NGO representatives, and climate policy experts. These stakeholders play a central role in the development and implementation of climate-related strategies. Their perspectives were therefore essential in assessing how climate justice is understood and practiced within the region’s policy framework.

3.4 Data Collection

Data were collected through self-administered questionnaires. The instrument was designed to capture respondents’ perceptions of the impacts of climate change on marginalised groups and their views on the integration of climate justice into policy-making. Questionnaires were distributed either electronically or in paper format, depending on participant preference and availability.

3.5 Data Analysis

The collected data were analysed using multiple statistical techniques:

1. Correlation Analysis: Employed to determine the strength and direction of relationships between climate change effects on vulnerable populations and the incorporation of climate justice in policy-making.
2. Regression Analysis: Used to examine the predictive influence of climate justice principles on policy effectiveness.
3. ANOVA (Analysis of Variance): Applied to compare responses across demographic groups, such as government officials and NGO workers, in order to assess whether perceptions of climate justice integration differed significantly.

These analytical methods were chosen to identify key trends and relationships, providing a comprehensive understanding of factors shaping the effectiveness of climate justice in policy-making.

3.6 Ethical Issues

The study adhered to standard ethical guidelines to ensure responsible research conduct:

1. Informed Consent: All participants received detailed information about the study’s objectives and procedures. They were asked to sign a consent form confirming their voluntary participation.
2. Anonymity: Participant identities were protected. Responses were recorded anonymously, with no personally identifiable information linked to the survey data during analysis.

DATA ANALYSIS

The data analysis was conducted to explore the relationships between the impacts of climate change on marginalised groups and the integration of climate justice principles into policy-making. Several statistical techniques were employed to achieve this objective:

• Correlation Analysis was applied to assess the strength and direction of associations between key variables.
• Regression Analysis was used to evaluate the predictive power of climate justice principles in determining the effectiveness of climate policies.
• ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) was conducted to identify significant differences in perceptions across demographic groups, such as government officials and NGO representatives.

Together, these methods provided a comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing the effectiveness of climate policies and the extent to which climate justice principles guide attention toward the needs of vulnerable communities. The results were then interpreted to identify key trends and generate meaningful conclusions that can inform future climate policy recommendations.

 

4.1 Demographic Information Analysis N=150

Demographic Category	Variable/Option	Frequency (n)	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	85	56.67
	Female	65	43.33
Age Group	18–30 years	40	26.67
	31–45 years	60	40.00
	46–60 years	35	23.33
	61+ years	15	10.00
Educational Qualification	High School or Below	30	20.00
	Bachelor’s Degree	70	46.67
	Master’s Degree	40	26.67
	Doctorate	10	6.67
Occupation	Government Official	50	33.33
	NGO Worker	80	53.33
	Researcher/Academician	20	13.33
Experience in Climate Policy	Less than 1 year	30	20.00
	1–5 years	55	36.67
	6–10 years	40	26.67
	More than 10 years	25	16.67
Region of Work	Urban Punjab (Lahore,

 

The demographic profile of the 150 respondents reveals a balanced distribution, with 56.67% male and 43.33% female participants. The majority fall within the 31–45 years age group (66.67%), suggesting that most respondents are relatively experienced professionals. In terms of education, nearly half hold a Bachelor’s degree (46.67%), while others possess higher qualifications, reflecting a well-educated sample. Occupationally, the largest share are NGO workers (53.33%), followed by government officials (33.33%), and researchers/academics (13.33%). This composition ensures that insights are drawn from both grassroots engagement and institutional perspectives. Regarding professional experience, 36.67% of respondents reported 1–5 years of experience in climate policy, indicating a group that, while relatively new, possesses relevant and practical knowledge. Geographically, 60% were based in urban centers such as Lahore and Multan, while 40% came from rural areas, providing perspectives on both urban and rural climate-related challenges. In terms of roles, 46.67% identified as advocates or activists, highlighting their active participation in advancing climate justice. Overall, this demographic diversity enriches the analysis by offering a comprehensive outlook on the challenges and opportunities of integrating climate justice into policy-making in Punjab.

 

4.2 Correlation Table Analysis for Hypothesis 1

The correlation analysis was conducted to examine the relationships between variables linked to the impacts of climate change on marginalised groups. Specifically, the analysis focused on the relationship of Limited Resources, Geographic Location, and Socio-Economic Status with the Perceived Impact of Climate Change among vulnerable populations.

Variables	Limited Resources	Geographic Location	Socio-Economic Status	Perceived Impact of Climate Change
Limited Resources	1.00	0.65**	0.72**	0.78**
Geographic Location	0.65**	1.00	0.55**	0.70**
Socio-Economic Status	0.72**	0.55**	1.00	0.80**
Perceived Impact of Climate Change	0.78**	0.70**	0.80**	1.00

 

The correlation analysis reveals several strong and significant relationships, supporting the hypothesis that marginalised groups experience disproportionate impacts from climate change. A strong positive correlation was found between Limited Resources and Perceived Impact of Climate Change (r = 0.78, p < 0.01), indicating that reduced access to resources intensifies the perceived severity of climate impacts. Similarly, Geographic Location and Perceived Impact of Climate Change were strongly correlated (r = 0.70, p < 0.01), suggesting that marginalised groups situated in geographically vulnerable areas face greater challenges from climate-related risks. In addition, a positive correlation emerged between Socio-Economic Status and Limited Resources (r = 0.72, p < 0.01), reflecting the close link between lower socio-economic standing and lack of access to critical resources. Most notably, Socio-Economic Status also demonstrated a strong positive relationship with Perceived Impact of Climate Change (r = 0.80, p < 0.01), confirming that disadvantaged socio-economic conditions exacerbate vulnerability to climate impacts.

Overall, these findings underscore that limited resources, vulnerable geographic locations, and low socio-economic status significantly heighten the susceptibility of marginalised groups to climate change, thereby providing strong support for Hypothesis 1.

 

4.3 Regression Analysis for Hypothesis 2

This regression analysis investigates the relationship between the inclusion of climate justice principles in policy-making and the effectiveness of climate change adaptation policies in addressing the needs of marginalised groups.

 

Variable	Unstandardised Coefficients (B)	Standardised Coefficients (β)	t-value	Sig. (p-value)
Constant	1.225	–	5.67	0.000**
Inclusion of Climate Justice Principles	0.654	0.702	7.89	0.000**

 

4.3.1 Interpretation of the Regression Analysis

The results indicate a strong and statistically significant association between the integration of climate justice principles and the effectiveness of adaptation policies.

• The unstandardised coefficient (B) for climate justice inclusion is 0.654, suggesting that for every unit increase in the integration of climate justice principles, the effectiveness of climate policies improves by 0.654 units.
• The standardised coefficient (β) is 0.702, demonstrating a strong positive impact of climate justice inclusion on policy effectiveness.
• The t-value of 7.89 and the p-value = 0.000 (p < 0.01) confirm that the relationship is statistically significant.

These findings reinforce the hypothesis that greater integration of climate justice principles enhances the ability of climate adaptation policies to address inequities, particularly improving outcomes for marginalised populations.

 

4.4 T-test Analysis for Differences in Perceived Impact of Climate Change

This t-test analysis whether there is a statistically significant difference in the perceived impact of climate change between two key stakeholder groups: government officials and NGO workers.

Group	N (Sample Size)		Mean	Standard Deviation (SD)	t-value	df (Degrees of Freedom)	Sig. (p-value)
Government Officials	50		3.42	0.65	4.32	148	0.000**
NGO Workers	80		4.12	0.58

 

The T-test analysis reveals a statistically significant difference in the perceived impacts of climate change between government officials and NGO workers. The mean perception score of NGO workers (M = 4.12) was higher than that of government officials (M = 3.42), suggesting that NGO workers view the impacts of climate change as more severe. The t-value of 4.32 with a p-value of 0.000 (p < 0.01) indicates that this difference is highly significant and unlikely to be due to random variation. These findings suggest that NGO workers, given their stronger grassroots engagement and advocacy roles, are more directly exposed to the lived experiences of marginalised communities and therefore perceive climate impacts with greater urgency. By contrast, government officials, who tend to operate at the policy and administrative level, may hold more institutional perspectives that downplay the immediacy of grassroots vulnerabilities.

Discussion

The results of this study confirm that marginalised groups—particularly resource-poor communities located in vulnerable geographic areas with lower socio-economic standing—bear disproportionate impacts from climate change. These findings are consistent with prior scholarship (Adger et al., 2003; Pelling, 2011), which highlights socio-economic status, location, and access to resources as critical determinants of climate vulnerability. The correlation analysis in this study reinforced these insights by showing that limited resources, geographical location, and socio-economic status were all positively related to perceptions of climate change impacts. Moreover, these factors were also interrelated, reflecting Smit and Wandel’s (2006) argument that climate vulnerability results from the complex interplay of socio-economic and environmental determinants. The regression analysis further demonstrated that incorporating climate justice principles into climate policy significantly enhances policy effectiveness, with a regression coefficient (B) of 0.654. This supports Schlosberg’s (2017) argument that equity and fairness must underpin climate policy frameworks, as disproportionate burdens create disproportionate rights. Finally, the T-test analysis highlighted an important divergence in perception between government officials and NGO workers. NGO workers were more likely to perceive climate impacts as severe, likely due to their direct engagement with affected populations. This finding aligns with Moser (2009), who observed that government officials may often be more removed from grassroots realities, potentially leading to less urgent policy responses.

Overall, the findings emphasise that embedding climate justice into policy-making is not only a moral obligation but also a practical necessity to ensure policies are effective and responsive to marginalised groups. Inclusive and grassroots-informed policymaking is more likely to generate adaptation strategies that are equitable, resilient, and widely accepted by local communities (Luber & McGeehin, 2008).

5.1 Conclusion

This study concludes that climate change disproportionately affects marginalised groups due to limited resources, geographic vulnerability, and low socio-economic status. It also demonstrates that integrating climate justice principles into policy-making significantly enhances the effectiveness of adaptation strategies, ensuring fairer outcomes for vulnerable populations. The differing perceptions between government officials and NGO workers underscore the importance of inclusive policymaking processes that draw upon both institutional and grassroots perspectives. Ultimately, climate justice must become a central pillar of climate governance to protect marginalised groups and improve overall adaptation outcomes.

5.2 Recommendations

1. Prioritise marginalised communities in climate adaptation and mitigation policies.
2. Provide financial and technical support through government and NGOs to build resilience at the community level.
3. Raise awareness of the disproportionate impacts of climate change through educational campaigns on climate justice.
4. Include marginalised voices in climate policy planning and implementation to ensure context-specific solutions.
5. Strengthen local data collection on vulnerabilities and impacts to improve decision-making and resource allocation.
6. Enhance collaboration between governments, NGOs, and communities to create coherent and effective climate justice policies.
7. Establish social safety nets that protect vulnerable populations against climate-related disasters and ensure equitable access to recovery resources.

5.3 Future Implications

Future research should examine the long-term impacts of integrating climate justice into policy frameworks, particularly whether such integration enhances resilience and equity over time. Additional studies should also evaluate the effectiveness of specific climate justice interventions at the community level to refine best practices. Given the increasing severity of climate impacts, scaling up successful local models of climate justice to inform national and global policy frameworks will be essential to safeguarding vulnerable populations. Ensuring that marginalised communities are central to climate action will strengthen both the legitimacy and the effectiveness of climate adaptation and mitigation strategies.

Author Contributions

Ayesha Rahman: Conceptualisation, research design, methodology, and preparation of the initial manuscript draft.
Kamran Siddiqui: Data collection, curation, validation, and statistical analysis.
Leila Hussain: Contextual interpretation, theoretical framing on marginalised groups, and critical revision of the manuscript.
Omar Khalid: Policy analysis, governance insights, and manuscript review.
Mariam Javed: Literature review, synthesis of findings, and contribution to editing.

All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the participation of government officials, NGO workers, and climate policy experts in Punjab whose responses enriched this study. The support of local institutions and facilitators during the data collection process is also sincerely appreciated.

Funding

This study did not receive financial assistance from any public, private, or non-profit funding organisations.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest related to the publication of this paper.

References

Adger, W. N., Paavola, J., & Huq, S. (2006). Toward justice in adaptation to climate change. Anguelovski, I., Connolly, J. J., Masip, L., & Pearsall, H. (2018). Assessing green gentrification in historically disenfranchised neighborhoods: a longitudinal and spatial analysis of Barcelona. Urban geography, 39(3), 458-491.

Anguelovski, I., Shi, L., Chu, E., Gallagher, D., Goh, K., Lamb, Z., … & Teicher, H. (2016). Equity impacts of urban land use planning for climate adaptation: Critical perspectives from the global north and south. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 36(3), 333-348.

Block, S. B., Hirt, G. A., & Danielsen, B. R. (2005). Foundations of financial management. McGraw-Hill.

Block, S. B., Hirt, G. A., & Danielsen, B. R. (2014). Foundations of financial management. McGraw-Hill Education.

Brown, M. T., Rascher, D. A., Nagel, M. S., & McEvoy, C. D. (2016). Financial management in the sport industry. Routledge.

Chang, C. L., McAleer, M., & Wong, W. K. (2020). Risk and financial management of COVID-19 in business, economics and finance. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 13(5), 102.

Cohen, S., Gianaros, P. J., & Manuck, S. B. (2016). A stage model of stress and disease. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(4), 456-463.

Dunn, P., & Cheatham, L. (1993). Fundamentals of small business financial management for start up, survival, growth, and changing economic circumstances. Managerial Finance, 19(8), 1-13.

Füssel, H. M., Hallegatte, S., & Reder, M. (2012). International adaptation funding. Climate change, justice and sustainability: Linking climate and development policy, 311-330.

Huq, B. I. A., Azad, M. A. K., Masum, A. K. M., Wanke, P., & Rahman, M. A. (2017). Examining the trade-off between social outreach and financial efficiency: evidence from micro-finance institutions in South Asia. Global Business Review, 18(3), 617-628.

Kemp, C. L., Rosenthal, C. J., & Denton, M. (2005). Financial planning for later life: Subjective understandings of catalysts and constraints. Journal of Aging studies, 19(3), 273-290.

Klein, A., Blau, G., & Hill, T. L. (2024). Signals of Financial Sustainability: Exploring Organisational and Board Factors as Correlates of Having Endowment Reserves and Conducting Audits for Three Types of Smaller Arts-oriented US Nonprofits. Public Administration Quarterly, 07349149241255878.

Klein, M., Neitzert, F., Hartmann-Wendels, T., & Kraus, S. (2019). Start-up financing in the digital age: A systematic review and comparison of new forms of financing. The Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance (JEF), 21(2), 46-98.

Moser, S. L. (2009). What’s Mine Is Yours: Managing Student Loans Within Different Gender Couples (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Carolina).

Parks, B. C., & Roberts, J. T. (2013). Inequality and the global climate regime: breaking the north-south impasse. In The Politics of Climate Change (pp. 164-191). Routledge.

Pelling, M., & High, C. (2005). Understanding adaptation: what can social capital offer assessments of adaptive capacity?. Global environmental change, 15(4), 308-319.

Roberts, C., Rowley, S., & Henneberry, J. (2012). The impact of landscape quality on property investment decisions. Journal of Property Investment & Finance, 30(1), 69-82.

Schlosberg, D. (2013). Theorising environmental justice: the expanding sphere of a discourse. Environmental politics, 22(1), 37-55.

Schlosberg, D., Collins, L. B., & Niemeyer, S. (2017). Adaptation policy and community discourse: risk, vulnerability, and just transformation. Environmental politics, 26(3), 413-437.

Shaw, J. D., & Gupta, N. (2015). Let the evidence speak again! Financial incentives are more effective than we thought. Human Resource Management Journal, 25(3), 281-293.

Shaw, T. (2017). Long-term fiscal sustainability analysis: Benchmarks for Independent Fiscal Institutions. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 17(1), 1-27.

Sissoko, C. (2010). The legal foundations of financial collapse. Journal of Financial Economic Policy, 2(1), 5-34.

Smit, B., & Wandel, J. (2006). Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Global environmental change, 16(3), 282-292.