Graduate studies at Western
Ethics, Policy and Environment 12 (3):267-281 (forthcoming)
|Abstract||One of the core debates concerning equity in the response to the threat of anthropogenic climate change is how the responsibility to reduce greenhouse gas emissions should be allocated, or, correspondingly, how the right to emit greenhouse gases should be allocated. Two alternative approaches that have been widely promoted are, first, to assign obligations to the industrialized countries on the basis of both their ability to pay (wealth) and their responsibility for the majority of prior emissions, or, second, to assign emissions rights on a (possibly modified) equal per capita basis. Both these proposals ignore intra-national distributional equity. Instead, we develop a policy framework we call 'Greenhouse Development Rights' (GDRs) which allocates obligations to pay for climate policies (both mitigation and adaptation) on the basis of an individually quantified metric of capacity (ability to pay) and responsibility (prior emissions). Crucially, the GDRs framework looks at the distribution of income within countries and treats people of equal wealth similarly, whatever country they live in. Thus even poor countries have obligations proportional to the size and wealth of their middle and upper classes, defined relative to a 'development threshold'. While this method nominally identifies the 'right to development' as applying to people, not countries, as a proposal for a treaty among sovereign nations, there is no obvious way to give legal meaning to that right. In this paper, then, we raise some of the philosophical and political questions that arise in trying to quantify capacity and responsibility and to use the 'right to development' as a principle for allocating costs.*|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Paul Baer, Tom Athanasiou, Sivan Kartha & Eric Kemp-Benedict (forthcoming). Greenhouse Development Rights: A Proposal for a Fair Global Climate Treaty. Ethics, Policy and Environment 12 (3):267-281.
Stephen J. DeCanio (1992). Carbon Rights and Economic Development. Critical Review 6 (2-3):389-410.
Simon Caney (2012). Just Emissions. Philosophy and Public Affairs 40 (4):255-300.
Darrel Moellendorf (2009). Treaty Norms and Climate Change Mitigation. Ethics and International Affairs 23 (3):247-265.
Edna Sussman, Energy Charter Treaty's Investor Protection Provisions: Potential to Foster Solutions to Global Warming and Promote Sustainable Development.
Jason Kawall (2011). Future Harms and Current Offspring. Ethics, Policy and Environment 14 (1):23-26.
Jay Odenbaugh (2010). Subsistence Versus Sustainable Emissions? Equity and Climate Change. Environmental Philosophy 7 (1):1-15.
Diana Mangalagiu (2007). Corporate Social Responsibility. Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 18:212-217.
Chris J. Cuomo (2011). Climate Change, Vulnerability, and Responsibility. Hypatia 26 (4):690-714.
Aaron Maltais (2013). Radically Non-Ideal Climate Politics and the Obligation to at Least Vote Green. Environmental Values 22 (5):589-608.
Lauren Hartzell-Nichols (2012). How is Climate Change Harmful? Ethics and the Environment 17 (2):97-110.
Simon Caney (2009). Justice and the Distribution of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Journal of Global Ethics 5 (2):125-146.
Rudolf Schüssler (2011). Climate Justice: A Question of Historic Responsibility? Journal of Global Ethics 7 (3):261-278.
William J. FitzPatrick (2007). Climate Change and the Rights of Future Generations. Environmental Ethics 29 (4):369-388.
Added to index2010-08-29
Total downloads12 ( #101,301 of 740,432 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,802 of 740,432 )
How can I increase my downloads?