The urgency of ecological problems has become increasingly complex, so responses from diverse parties are needed, including in the context of ecological citizenship. The general hypothesis proposed in this research is that the problem of climate change has an influence on the high level of attention of the global community, including academics, to environmental issues related to the active role of citizens demanding environmental justice and sustainable development. This study aims to explore globally published documents to provide an in-depth discussion concerning ecological citizenship. Bibliometric analysis was employed from the Scopus database. The main findings confirm the significant contribution of ecological citizenship in shaping global understanding of the role of individuals in maintaining environmental sustainability. The research theme mapping shows the diversity of issues that have been explored, with particular emphasis on environmental education and social justice, providing a basis for recommendations for future research. In particular, environmental education has been recognized as a critical element in shaping society’s understanding of environmental issues, while social justice underscores the importance of fair distribution and critical analysis of inequality in social and ecological contexts. Future research recommendations include the exploration of effective strategies in promoting the concept of ecological citizenship, developing a holistic environmental education curriculum, and more active research in the context of social justice in various regions, including Asia. This bibliometric analysis is expected to contribute substantially to formulating policies and practical actions that support the vision of inclusive ecological citizenship, which positively impacts overcoming global environmental challenges.

Inequity in infrastructure distribution and social injustice’s effects on Ethiopia’s efforts to build a democratic society are examined in this essay. By ensuring fair access to infrastructure, justice, and economic opportunity, those who strive for social justice aim to redistribute resources in order to increase the well-being of individuals, communities, and the nine regional states. The effects that social inequity and injustice of access to infrastructure have on Ethiopia’s efforts to develop a democratic society were the focus of the study. Time series analysis using principal component analysis (PCA) and composite infrastructure index (CII), as well as structural equation modeling–partial least squares (SEM-PLS), were necessary to investigate this issue scientifically. This study also used in-depth interviews and focus group discussions to support the quantitative approach. The research study finds that public infrastructure investments have failed or have been disrupted, negatively impacting state- and nation-building processes of Ethiopia. The findings of this research also offer theories of coordination, equity, and infrastructure equity that would enable equitable infrastructure access as a just and significant component of nation-building processes using democratic federalism. Furthermore, this contributes to both knowledge and methodology. As a result, indigenous state capability is required to assure infrastructure equity and social justice, as well as to implement the state-nation nested set of policies that should almost always be a precondition for effective state- and nation-building processes across Ethiopia’s regional states.

This research study was undertaken to complete a comparative study of the seminal work conducted by Anderson and Ruderman on procedural and distributive justice systems versus unionization. This research was conducted in 2023. The main focus of this research effort was to determine if current U.S. organizations were utilizing any form of justice system in protecting employees’ rights and providing processes that would prevent employees from having a desire to join a union for its protections. Parts of the original survey used by Anderson and Ruderman were used in this study to address the research questions and hypotheses posed for this study. A statistical analysis of the data was conducted, and the results indicated employees have a need for protection in their employment relationship. It is suggested that procedural and distributive justice systems be implemented as an alternative to unionization of employees to meet these employee protections.

Through a comparative investigation of the function of socialist realism in the drama and law of Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa, this research investigates the decolonization of neo-colonial hegemonies in Africa. Using the drama and legal systems of Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa as comparative case studies, the research explores how African societies can challenge and demolish oppressive systems of domination sustained by colonial legacies and contemporary neo-colonial forces. Relying on the Socialist Realism and Critical Postcolonial theoretical frameworks which both support literary and artistic genre that encourages social and political transformation, the research deploys the case study analysis, comparative literature analysis and focused group discussion methods. Data obtained are subjected to content and thematic analysis. The study emphasizes how important the relationship between the legal and artistic worlds is to the fight against neo-colonialism. It further reveals the transformational potential of socialist realism as a catalyst for social change by looking at themes of resistance, social justice, and the amplifying of disadvantaged voices in drama and legal discourse. The research contributes to ongoing discussions about de-neo-colonization through this comparative case study, and emphasizes the role socialist realism plays in overthrowing neo-colonial hegemonies. The study sheds light on the distinct difficulties and opportunities these nations—and indeed, all of Africa—face in their pursuit of decolonial justice by examining the experiences of Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa.

While the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Council is sometimes criticized for the potential influence of political agendas on its decisions, while the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is criticized for its limited jurisdiction and dependence on the party's willingness to accept the ICJ's jurisdiction, a crucial concern is raised over the efficiency of the current Dispute Resolution Mechanisms (DRM) for aviation industry related disputes. Unravelling the compelling inquiry that hangs in the air: Just how efficient is the current aviation arbitration legal system? Is the efficiency of this system available to ad hoc arbitration¹ or arbitral tribunals²? The authors aim to analyze the existing legal guidance to navigate the complex arbitration system. This article sheds light on precedent cases by the ICAO Council and the ICJ studying challenges, such as the lack of efficiency of the ICAO Council and the criticism of the Council's ineffectiveness for being hampered by the political interests of Member States. As well as the ICJ as it may be a more powerful authority in resolving such disputes, it also faces multiple challenges including the lack of enforcement, jurisdiction issues, and political influence, which in return makes it unlikely for dispute parties to seek the ICAO or the ICJ for resolution of their disputes, instead parties have now mostly adopted arbitration clauses as their primary dispute resolution method under Air Services Agreements (ASAs) and other aviation related agreements. While ad hoc arbitration has shown effectiveness and success, its secrecy and confidentiality might result in inconsistency and the inability to develop a case law system. The authors note the urgent need for an arbitration institution³ under the United Nations (UN) umbrella specialized in air law and aviation technology disputes, with the power to issue an enforceable, legally binding ruling. The article also examines the realm of arbitration in the aerospace industry, analyzing legal resources, current aviation arbitration systems, centres, and platforms, and further analyzing case studies to assess the results of the efficiency of each Dispute Resolution Mechanism.