David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Social Philosophy Today 19:89-101 (2003)
The current debate surrounding the implementation of the Kyoto Treaty raises several issues that ought to be of interest to social and political philosophers. Proponents and critics alike have invoked ideas of fairness in justification of their positions. The two distinct conceptions of fairness that are involved in this debate—one of fair shares, and another of fair burdens—helpfully illuminate the proper role of fairness in designing an equitable and effective global climate regime. In this paper, I critically examine the idea of fairness as manifest in two contending visions of the proper international response to mounting evidence that human activity is causing climate change, and that harm from this change is likely to exacerbate existing inequalities. In addition, I recommend one idea of fairness (the fair shares conception) and the political program that it implies
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Aaron Maltais (Early view). Failing International Climate Politics and the Fairness of Going First. Political Studies.
Percy B. Lehning (1998). The Coherence of Rawls's Plea for Democratic Equality. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 1 (4):1-41.
Jonathan Pickering, Steve Vanderheiden & Seumas Miller (2012). “If Equity’s in, We're Out”: Scope for Fairness in the Next Global Climate Agreement. Ethics and International Affairs 26 (4):423-443.
Angela Ballantyne (2008). 'Fair Benefits' Accounts of Exploitation Require a Normative Principle of Fairness: Response to Gbadegesin and Wendler, and Emanuel Et Al. Bioethics 22 (4):239–244.
Steven Wall (2006). Rawls and the Status of Political Liberty. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87 (2):245–270.
Roberto Alejandro (1998). The Limits of Rawlsian Justice. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Richard L. Lippke (1993). Justice and Insider Trading. Journal of Applied Philosophy 10 (2):215-226.
Jiafeng Zhu (2014). Fairness, Political Obligation, and the Justificatory Gap. Journal of Moral Philosophy:1-23.
Keith Horton (2004). International Aid: The Fair Shares Factor. Social Theory and Practice 30 (2):161-174.
Jonathan Pickering & Christian Barry (2012). On the Concept of Climate Debt: Its Moral and Political Value. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 15 (5):667-685.
Nicholas Martens, What's so Fair About the Status Quo? [Electronic Resource] : Examining Fairness Criteria as Moderators of System Justification.
Toby Svoboda, Klaus Keller, Marlos Goes & Nancy Tuana (2011). Sulfate Aerosol Geoengineering: The Question of Justice. Public Affairs Quarterly 25 (3):157-180.
P. Jones & I. O'Flynn (2013). Can a Compromise Be Fair? Politics, Philosophy and Economics 12 (2):115-135.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2011-12-02
Total downloads1 ( #438,484 of 1,101,075 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?