Climate change ethics

Last updated
Size corresponds to climate change vulnerability (determined by the University of Notre-Dame's ND-Gain Index), with larger countries being more vulnerable. Color corresponds to total GHG emissions including land-use change (2011), with a darker shade indicating higher emissions. Climate Ethics Cartogram.jpg
Size corresponds to climate change vulnerability (determined by the University of Notre-Dame’s ND-Gain Index), with larger countries being more vulnerable. Color corresponds to total GHG emissions including land-use change (2011), with a darker shade indicating higher emissions.

Climate change ethics is a field of study that explores the moral aspects of climate change. Climate change is often studied and addressed by scientists, economists, and policymakers in value neutral ways. However, philosophers such as Stephen M. Gardiner [1] and the scientific authors of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), [2] argue that decisions related to climate change are moral issues and involve value judgment. Climate change involves difficult moral questions relating to global inequality and human development, who bears responsibility for past emissions, as well as the role of future generations, personal responsibility and many more.

Contents

The two main ethical implications of climate change are related to its effects. The causes and effects of climate change are unrelated in time and space. Anthropogenic climate change is caused mainly by humans burning fossil fuels. [3] The primary beneficiaries of fossil fuel burning are developed countries whereas the majority of climate impacts will be felt by the developing world. [4] Further, climate change occurs on timescales much greater than a single generation of the human population, causing conflict between economic and political interests which are products of society and the interests of future people—an ethical and moral concept.

Beginnings

Climate change has become a concern for a number of disciplines due to its potentially catastrophic impacts on environmental systems, wildlife, nature, and humans. Climate change poses a serious threat to the global economy as economic development, especially in the West, has been largely dependent on the extraction and burning of fossil fuels since the Industrial Revolution. [5] Burning fossil fuels increases the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere which is the primary driver of current global anthropogenic climate change. [6] This notion has led to the study of the economics of climate change. Climate change is also a deeply political issue as there are disagreements among actors on whether and to what extent society should act on climate change. [7] Economics is insufficient to guide policymaking alone, however, as it is only capable making predictions regarding how different policy decisions will affect the economy and how to proceed along those different pathways; it cannot tell us which pathway to choose, that is determined by which values we act on as a society. [8] Because of this, some philosophers have argued that climate change is “fundamentally an ethical issue” [1] which raises questions about "how we ought to live, what kinds of societies we want, and how we should relate to nature and other forms of life.” [8]

Global justice

Climate change can be considered a global justice issue because the actors with the largest contribution to climate change are not the ones suffering from the most severe impacts. Historically, wealthy, developed nations have been emitting, and currently emit, disproportionally large amounts of greenhouse gases compared to poorer developing nations. [4] For example, Bangladesh is highly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. [9] The country's per capita emissions are 1/20 of the global average and 1/100 of the per capita emissions in the United States, but its low-lying topography makes it extremely vulnerable to sea level rise and cyclones—which are predicted to increase in frequency and intensity with climate change. Thus climate change can be seen as a global justice issue because the perpetrators of climate change impacts (developed nations) and the victims of those impacts (developing nations) are distinct actors. [4]

In addition to climate change being a global justice issue due to the disparities between the roles of developed and developing nations, the global justice issue can also be framed in terms of wealth. "Half the world’s carbon is emitted by the world’s richest 500 million people" [4] meaning that regardless of where one lives, the higher their income, the higher their emissions. Although the United States has one of the highest per capita greenhouse gas emissions in the world, [10] there are lower-income people in the U.S. with relatively lower emissions. [11] Further, poorer people, regardless of where they live, are more likely to experience the effects of climate change because they have a reduced means to adapt compared to rich people. [4]

Intergenerational ethics

Global warming--the progression from cooler historical temperatures (blue) to recent warmer temperatures (red)--is being experienced disproportionately by younger generations. With continued fossil fuel emissions, that trend that will continue. 20240625 Global warming across generations - warming stripes.svg
Global warming—the progression from cooler historical temperatures (blue) to recent warmer temperatures (red)—is being experienced disproportionately by younger generations. With continued fossil fuel emissions, that trend that will continue.

The intergenerational ethics of climate change addresses the responsibility of current generations to be environmentally conscious to and ensure the sustainable use of environmental resources can continue for future generations. [13] Moral responsibility is a crucial consideration in intergenerational climate change ethics. This responsibility extends to various interests, including humans, animals, future people, and nature. The interests of the current generation must be weighed against those of future generations, balancing current needs against future aspirations. [13]

The effects of climate change are dispersed temporally and spatially. Ethical implications due to spatial dispersion are those discussed in the previous section on global justice: those causing the problem are not in the same physical space as those experiencing the worst of its effects. Temporal ethical implications mainly relate to the fact that current greenhouse gas emissions will affect future generations more than they will affect current people. [13] This notion of pushing climate change impacts on future people poses epistemic difficulties, making it hard to grasp cause and effect, which could undermine motivation to respond. [13] Institutional inadequacy further complicates the issue. Democratic political institutions have relatively short time horizons which are at odds with the timescale of global climate change. Politicians are concerned about voter support for the next election, on a scale of a few years, whereas climate change operates on much longer timescales of hundreds to thousands of years. Therefore, climate change gets put on the back burner of political agendas because it won’t help politicians win the next election cycle. [13]

Economics

Economists propose prioritizing adaptation over mitigation due to high costs associated with mitigation; however, conventional economic analyses have philosophical limitations. Such analyses discount future generations and prioritize human interests, failing to consider all relevant costs and benefits of climate change mitigation. Henry Shrue argues that the "No Harm Principle" gives us reason for acting on climate change, despite the uncertainty of future impacts. [1]

Temporal discounting

The concept of temporal discounting in economics is relevant to climate change ethics due to the temporal dispersion of its effects. Economists use discount rates to determine the value of future goods because it is assumed that the global economy will continue to grow and future people will have more goods than current people. The more goods you have, the less valuable any one good is, hence, it is discounted. [14] Using different discount rates, economists can arrive at very different conclusions regarding how much of the global budget should be dedicated to climate change mitigation, adaptation, or other things. [14] Prioritarianism offers one ethical justification for imploring a high discount rate is that because future people will be better off than we are today, benefiting people today is more valuable than benefiting future people. [14] Utilitarianism on the other hand, favors a lower discount rate (or none) under the idea that benefits to future people are equally valuable as benefits to current people. [14]

Human rights

Climate change is a pressing issue that threatens the basic human rights of individuals and communities around the world. Climate change violates several human rights, including the right to life, health, food, water, and shelter. [15] Climate change exacerbates existing inequalities and disproportionately affects vulnerable populations, such as low-income communities, indigenous peoples, and small island developing states. Adopting a rights-based approach to climate change that recognizes the link between climate change and human rights would provide significant improvements.

A moral threshold approach to climate change that identifies the minimum standards to protect human rights. This approach involves identifying a set of moral principles that establish the minimum standards of protection required to ensure that human rights are not violated by climate change. [15] The moral threshold approach also involves identifying the duties and responsibilities of different actors in addressing climate change, including states, corporations, and individuals.

States can take action to address climate change, as they are the primary sources of greenhouse gas emissions. States can take measures to reduce their emissions and contribute to the global effort to limit the increase in global temperatures. Additionally, corporations have a responsibility to reduce their emissions and contribute to sustainable development. [15] Individuals can play a role by adopting sustainable lifestyles and advocating for policies that address climate change. It is also an open moral question whether or not acts of civil disobedience by individuals or groups aimed at raising awareness of the climate crisis can be justified.

Climate change is a human rights issue that requires action. There is a high need for a rights-based approach to climate change and proposes a moral threshold framework for addressing this issue. By recognizing the link between climate change and human rights, people can work towards a more just and equitable future for all. It is the responsibility of all actors, including states, corporations, and individuals, to take action to address climate change and protect human rights.

Related Research Articles

This glossary of climate change is a list of definitions of terms and concepts relevant to climate change, global warming, and related topics.

The Mainau Declaration refers to any one of three socio-political appeals by Nobel laureates who participated in the Lindau Nobel Laureate Meetings, the annual gathering with young scientists at the German town of Lindau. The name denotes that these declarations were presented on Mainau Island in Lake Constance, the traditional venue of the last day of the one-week meeting.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Climate change mitigation</span> Actions to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions to limit climate change

Climate change mitigation (or decarbonisation) is action to limit the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere that cause climate change. Climate change mitigation actions include conserving energy and replacing fossil fuels with clean energy sources. Secondary mitigation strategies include changes to land use and removing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere. Current climate change mitigation policies are insufficient as they would still result in global warming of about 2.7 °C by 2100, significantly above the 2015 Paris Agreement's goal of limiting global warming to below 2 °C.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Carbon footprint</span> Concept to quantify greenhouse gas emissions from activities or products

A carbon footprint (or greenhouse gas footprint) is a calculated value or index that makes it possible to compare the total amount of greenhouse gases that an activity, product, company or country adds to the atmosphere. Carbon footprints are usually reported in tonnes of emissions (CO2-equivalent) per unit of comparison. Such units can be for example tonnes CO2-eq per year, per kilogram of protein for consumption, per kilometer travelled, per piece of clothing and so forth. A product's carbon footprint includes the emissions for the entire life cycle. These run from the production along the supply chain to its final consumption and disposal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Economic analysis of climate change</span>

An economic analysis of climate change uses economic tools and models to calculate the magnitude and distribution of damages caused by climate change. It can also give guidance for the best policies for mitigation and adaptation to climate change from an economic perspective. There are many economic models and frameworks. For example, in a cost–benefit analysis, the trade offs between climate change impacts, adaptation, and mitigation are made explicit. For this kind of analysis, integrated assessment models (IAMs) are useful. Those models link main features of society and economy with the biosphere and atmosphere into one modelling framework. The total economic impacts from climate change are difficult to estimate. In general, they increase the more the global surface temperature increases.

The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change is a 700-page report released for the Government of the United Kingdom on 30 October 2006 by economist Nicholas Stern, chair of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics (LSE) and also chair of the Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy (CCCEP) at Leeds University and LSE. The report discusses the effect of global warming on the world economy. Although not the first economic report on climate change, it is significant as the largest and most widely known and discussed report of its kind.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intergenerational equity</span> Concept of fairness or justice between generations

Intergenerational equity in economic, psychological, and sociological contexts, is the idea of fairness or justice between generations. The concept can be applied to fairness in dynamics between children, youth, adults, and seniors. It can also be applied to fairness between generations currently living and future generations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Greenhouse gas emissions</span> Greenhouse gases emitted from human activities

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from human activities intensify the greenhouse effect. This contributes to climate change. Carbon dioxide, from burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas, is the main cause of climate change. The largest annual emissions are from China followed by the United States. The United States has higher emissions per capita. The main producers fueling the emissions globally are large oil and gas companies. Emissions from human activities have increased atmospheric carbon dioxide by about 50% over pre-industrial levels. The growing levels of emissions have varied, but have been consistent among all greenhouse gases. Emissions in the 2010s averaged 56 billion tons a year, higher than any decade before. Total cumulative emissions from 1870 to 2022 were 703 GtC, of which 484±20 GtC from fossil fuels and industry, and 219±60 GtC from land use change. Land-use change, such as deforestation, caused about 31% of cumulative emissions over 1870–2022, coal 32%, oil 24%, and gas 10%.

The social cost of carbon (SCC) is the marginal cost of the impacts caused by emitting one extra tonne of carbon emissions at any point in time. The purpose of putting a price on a tonne of emitted CO2 is to aid policymakers or other legislators in evaluating whether a policy designed to curb climate change is justified. The social cost of carbon is a calculation focused on taking corrective measures on climate change which can be deemed a form of market failure. The only governments which use the SCC are in North America. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change suggested that a carbon price of $100 per tonne of CO2 could reduce global GHG emissions by at least half the 2019 level by 2030.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Climate justice</span> Concept for social justice in climate change context

Climate justice is a type of environmental justice that focuses on the unequal impacts of climate change on marginalized or otherwise vulnerable populations. Climate justice seeks to achieve an equitable distribution of both the burdens of climate change and the efforts to mitigate climate change. The economic burden of climate change mitigation is estimated by some at around 1% to 2% of GDP. Climate justice examines concepts such as equality, human rights, collective rights, justice and the historical responsibilities for climate change.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">IPCC Fifth Assessment Report</span> Intergovernmental report on climate change in 2014

The Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the fifth in a series of such reports and was completed in 2014. As had been the case in the past, the outline of the AR5 was developed through a scoping process which involved climate change experts from all relevant disciplines and users of IPCC reports, in particular representatives from governments. Governments and organizations involved in the Fourth Report were asked to submit comments and observations in writing with the submissions analysed by the panel. Projections in AR5 are based on "Representative Concentration Pathways" (RCPs). The RCPs are consistent with a wide range of possible changes in future anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Projected changes in global mean surface temperature and sea level are given in the main RCP article.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Climate debt</span> Climate change debt concept

Climate debt is the debt said to be owed to developing countries by developed countries for the damage caused by their disproportionately large contributions to climate change. Historical global greenhouse gas emissions, largely by developed countries, pose significant threats to developing countries, who are less able to deal with climate change's negative effects. Therefore, some consider developed countries to owe a debt to developing ones for their disproportionate contributions to climate change.

Climate reparations are a type of requested loss and damage payments for damage and harm caused by climate change, which may include debt cancellation. The term climate reparations differs from simple "loss and damage," in that it is based on the concept of reparations, that compensation holds countries accountable for historical emissions, and is an ethical and moral obligation.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) began regulating greenhouse gases (GHGs) under the Clean Air Act from mobile and stationary sources of air pollution for the first time on January 2, 2011. Standards for mobile sources have been established pursuant to Section 202 of the CAA, and GHGs from stationary sources are currently controlled under the authority of Part C of Title I of the Act. The basis for regulations was upheld in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in June 2012.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Representative Concentration Pathway</span> Projections used in climate change modeling

Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP) are climate change scenarios to project future greenhouse gas concentrations. These pathways describe future greenhouse gas concentrations and have been formally adopted by the IPCC. The pathways describe different climate change scenarios, all of which were considered possible depending on the amount of greenhouse gases (GHG) emitted in the years to come. The four RCPs – originally RCP2.6, RCP4.5, RCP6, and RCP8.5 – are labelled after the expected changes in radiative forcing values from the year 1750 to the year 2100. The IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) began to use these four pathways for climate modeling and research in 2014. The higher values mean higher greenhouse gas emissions and therefore higher global surface temperatures and more pronounced effects of climate change. The lower RCP values, on the other hand, are more desirable for humans but would require more stringent climate change mitigation efforts to achieve them.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Carbon budget</span> Limit on carbon dioxide emission for a given climate impact

A carbon budget is a concept used in climate policy to help set emissions reduction targets in a fair and effective way. It examines the "maximum amount of cumulative net global anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions that would result in limiting global warming to a given level". It can be expressed relative to the pre-industrial period. In this case, it is the total carbon budget. Or it can be expressed from a recent specified date onwards. In that case it is the remaining carbon budget.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C</span> Special climate change report published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

The Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C (SR15) was published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on 8 October 2018. The report, approved in Incheon, South Korea, includes over 6,000 scientific references, and was prepared by 91 authors from 40 countries. In December 2015, the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference called for the report. The report was delivered at the United Nations' 48th session of the IPCC to "deliver the authoritative, scientific guide for governments" to deal with climate change. Its key finding is that meeting a 1.5 °C (2.7 °F) target is possible but would require "deep emissions reductions" and "rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society". Furthermore, the report finds that "limiting global warming to 1.5 °C compared with 2 °C would reduce challenging impacts on ecosystems, human health and well-being" and that a 2 °C temperature increase would exacerbate extreme weather, rising sea levels and diminishing Arctic sea ice, coral bleaching, and loss of ecosystems, among other impacts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Special Report on Climate Change and Land</span> IPCC report

The United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) Special Report on Climate Change and Land (SRCCL), also known as the "Special Report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems", is a landmark study from 2019 by 107 experts from 52 countries. The SRCCL provides a comprehensive overview of the entire land-climate system for the first time and decided to enlist land as a "critical resource". The IPCC's 50th session (IPCC-50) formally adopted the SRCCL's Summary for policymakers (SPM) and approved the underlying report. The SPM and the full text of Special Report on Climate Change and Land—in an unedited form—were released on 8 August 2019. The report is over 1,300 pages long and includes the work of 107 experts from 52 countries.

Lukas H. Meyer is a German philosopher, academic and author. He is a university professor as well as speaker of the working section Moral and Political Philosophy at the University of Graz.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Gardiner, Stephen M. (April 2004). "Ethics and Global Climate Change". Ethics. 114 (3): 556. doi:10.1086/382247. S2CID   722697.
  2. IPCC. 2001. Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available at http://www.ipcc.ch .
  3. Lynas, Mark; Houlton, Benjamin Z.; Perry, Simon (2021). "Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature". Environmental Research Letters. 16 (11): 114005. Bibcode:2021ERL....16k4005L. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966 . ISSN   1748-9326. S2CID   239032360.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 Jamieson, Dale (2011-03-31), "Energy, ethics, and the transformation of nature", The Ethics of Global Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, pp. 16–37, doi:10.1017/cbo9780511732294.002, ISBN   9781107000698 , retrieved 2023-03-08
  5. Watts, Jonathan (2020-02-19). "Oil and gas firms 'have had far worse climate impact than thought'". The Guardian. ISSN   0261-3077 . Retrieved 2023-03-08.
  6. WMO (2021). State of the global climate 2020. Petteri Taalas, António Guterres. Genf. ISBN   978-92-63-11264-4. OCLC   1281669822.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  7. Dessler, Andrew Emory (2020). The science and politics of global climate change : a guide to the debate. Edward Parson (3rd ed.). Cambridge, United Kingdom. ISBN   978-1-107-17942-4. OCLC   1112371640.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  8. 1 2 Jamieson, Dale (2010-08-26), "Ethics, Public Policy, and Global Warming", Climate Ethics, Oxford University Press, doi:10.1093/oso/9780195399622.003.0011, ISBN   978-0-19-539962-2 , retrieved 2023-03-08
  9. Kulp, Scott A.; Strauss, Benjamin H. (2019-10-29). "New elevation data triple estimates of global vulnerability to sea-level rise and coastal flooding". Nature Communications. 10 (1): 4844. Bibcode:2019NatCo..10.4844K. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-12808-z. ISSN   2041-1723. PMC   6820795 . PMID   31664024.
  10. Stevens, Pippa (26 November 2019). "US leads greenhouse gas emissions on a per capita basis, report finds". CNBC. Retrieved 2023-03-10.
  11. Schonhardt, Sara. "Rich Americans Have Higher Carbon Footprints Than Other Wealthy People". Scientific American. Retrieved 2023-03-10.
  12. 1 2 "Warming Across Generations". Climate Central. 22 March 2023. Archived from the original on 13 June 2024.
  13. 1 2 3 4 5 Gardiner, Stephen M. (2006). "A Perfect Moral Storm: Climate Change, Intergenerational Ethics and the Problem of Moral Corruption". Environmental Values. 15 (3): 397–413. doi:10.3197/096327106778226293. ISSN   0963-2719. JSTOR   30302196.
  14. 1 2 3 4 Broome, John (June 2008). "The Ethics of Climate Change". Scientific American. 298 (6): 96–102. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0608-96. ISSN   0036-8733. PMID   18642548.
  15. 1 2 3 Caney, Simon (November 12, 2020). "Climate Change, Human Rights, and Moral Thresholds', Climate Ethics: Essential Readings". academic.oup.com. doi:10.1093/oso/9780195399622.003.0018 . Retrieved 2023-03-27.