David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ethics and International Affairs 23 (3):247-265 (2009)
Abstract Currently the international community is discussing the regulatory framework to replace the Kyoto Protocol after 2012. The unveiling of the new framework is scheduled to occur at the December 2009 COP in Copenhagen. The stakes are high, since any treaty will affect the development prospects of per capita poor countries and will determine the climate change–related costs borne by poor people for centuries to come. Failure to arrive at an agreement would have grave effects on the development prospects of poor countries, many of which will experience the most severe effects of climate change. The original UNFCCC treaty recognizes these kinds of concerns and requires that further treaty negotiation pay them heed. Any agreement will be required to conform to UNFCCC norms related to sustainable development and the equitable distribution of responsibilities. In this paper I argue that UNFCCC norms tightly constrain the range of acceptable agreements for the distribution of burdens to mitigate climate change. I conclude that any legitimate treaty must put much heavier mitigation burdens on industrialized developed countries. Of the various proposals that have received international attention, two in particular stand out as possibly satisfying UNFCCC norms regarding the distribution of responsibilities.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Darrel Moellendorf (2015). Climate Change Justice. Philosophy Compass 10 (3):173-186.
Ewan Kingston (2014). Climate Change as a Three-Part Ethical Problem: A Response to Jamieson and Gardiner. Science and Engineering Ethics 20 (4):1129-1148.
Similar books and articles
Duane Windsor (2009). Global Justice and Global Climate Change. Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 20:23-34.
Paul G. Harris (2008). Implementing Climate Equity: The Case of Europe. Journal of Global Ethics 4 (2):121 – 140.
Lindsay F. Wiley (2010). Mitigation/Adaptation and Health: Health Policymaking in the Global Response to Climate Change and Implications for Other Upstream Determinants. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 38 (3):629-639.
Jonny Anomaly (2010). Combating Resistance: The Case for a Global Antibiotics Treaty. Public Health Ethics 3 (1):13-22.
Anders Nordgren (2012). Ethical Issues in Mitigation of Climate Change: The Option of Reduced Meat Production and Consumption. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 25 (4):563-584.
Paul Baer, Tom Athanasiou, Sivan Kartha & Eric Kemp-Benedict (2009). Greenhouse Development Rights: A Proposal for a Fair Global Climate Treaty. Ethics, Place and Environment 12 (3):267-281.
Christopher Michaelson (2011). Morally Differentiating Responsibility for Climate Change Mitigation. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 30 (1-2):113-136.
Added to index2009-09-25
Total downloads30 ( #139,357 of 1,934,425 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #434,207 of 1,934,425 )
How can I increase my downloads?