Climate change and negative duties

POLITICS 32:1-9 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX


It is widely accepted by the scientific community and beyond that human beings are primarily responsible for climate change and that climate change has brought with it a number of real problems. These problems include, but are not limited to, greater threats to coastal communities, greater risk of famine, and greater risk that tropical diseases may spread to new territory. In keeping with J. S. Mill's 'Harm Principle', green political theorists often respond that if we are contributing a harm to others in contributing to climate change and its negative effects, we then have a negative duty to assist those we have harmed and to reduce our carbon emissions. In this paper, I will take seriously negative duties stemming from a contribution to climate change and demonstrate that our negative duties do not demand that we necessarily end our contribution to climate change if we were able to compensate those who may be affected by climate change. Thus, the conclusion of many green political theorists - that we must reduce our carbon emissions - does not necessarily follow from the view that humans are primarily responsible for climate change and its attended ill effects.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 89,560

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library


Added to PP

248 (#72,066)

6 months
3 (#431,291)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Thom Brooks
Durham University

Citations of this work

Der Vorrang des Pflichtbegriffs in kollektiven Kontexten.Maike Albertzart - 2015 - Zeitschrift für Praktische Philosophie 2 (2):87-120.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references