Book contents
- Climate Justice and Historical Emissions
- Climate Justice and Historical Emissions
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Introduction
- 1 Climate Ethics, Affirmative Action, and Unjust Enrichment
- 2 Historical Responsibility and Climate Change
- 3 Historical Emissions
- 4 How Legal Systems Deal with Issues of Responsibility for Past Harmful Behavior
- 5 Asking Beneficiaries to Pay for Past Pollution
- 6 Benefiting from Unjust Acts and Benefiting from Injustice
- 7 A Luck-Based Moral Defense of Grandfathering
- 8 In Defense of Emissions Egalitarianism?
- 9 In the Name of Political Possibility
- 10 Right to Development and Historical Emissions
- Index
- References
7 - A Luck-Based Moral Defense of Grandfathering
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 February 2017
Book contents
- Climate Justice and Historical Emissions
- Climate Justice and Historical Emissions
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Introduction
- 1 Climate Ethics, Affirmative Action, and Unjust Enrichment
- 2 Historical Responsibility and Climate Change
- 3 Historical Emissions
- 4 How Legal Systems Deal with Issues of Responsibility for Past Harmful Behavior
- 5 Asking Beneficiaries to Pay for Past Pollution
- 6 Benefiting from Unjust Acts and Benefiting from Injustice
- 7 A Luck-Based Moral Defense of Grandfathering
- 8 In Defense of Emissions Egalitarianism?
- 9 In the Name of Political Possibility
- 10 Right to Development and Historical Emissions
- Index
- References
Summary
Emissions grandfathering apportions emission rights according to historically established emission levels. Only very recently have Bovens (2011) and Knight (2013, 2014) produced the first sustained philosophical defenses of grandfathering. The paper will argue that Bovens’ Lockean justification of emissions grandfathering fails but take up his idea of temporary grandfathering, which will be developed in new directions on the basis of luck-related justice. In contrast to Knight’s (2014) luck egalitarian approach, I will suggest temporary remedies only against brute bad luck that comes in the form of external shocks. It is a shock to find oneself without one’s fault, as the citizens of industrialized countries did in 1990, in conditions that require a massive lifestyle change. However, rather than compensation it is time for adaptation to a new situation that should in principle be granted to relatively affluent people who are seriously affected by external shocks. This legitimates successive proportional emission cuts in industrialized countries relative to a reference year such as 1990.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Climate Justice and Historical Emissions , pp. 141 - 164Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2017
References
Arnold, D. (2011). The Ethics of Global Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohringer, C. (2005). On the Design of Optimal Grandfathering Schemes for Emission. European Economic Review, 49, 2041–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bovens, L. (2011). A Lockean Defense of Grandfathering Emission Rights. In The Ethics of Global Climate Change, ed. Arnold, D.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 124–44.Google Scholar
Brandt, U. (2009). The Choice between Auctioning and Grandfathering in the EU. Energy and Environment, 20, 1117–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caney, S. (2006). Environmental Degradation, Reparations, and the Moral Significance of History. Journal of Social Philosophy, 37, 464–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caney, S. (2009). Justice and the Distribution of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Journal of Global Ethics, 5, 125–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caney, S. (2010). Climate Change and the Duties of the Advantaged. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 13, 203–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casson, D. (2011). Liberating Judgment: Fanatics, Skeptics, and John Locke’s Politics of Probability. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Culp, J. (2011). Comment on Lukas Meyer and Pranay Sanklecha. Analyse & Kritik, 33, 473–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enkvist, P., Nauclér, T., and Rosander, J. (2007).A Cost Curve for Greenhouse Gas Reduction. McKinsey Quarterly, 1, 35–45.Google Scholar
Gosseries, A. (2007). Cosmopolitan Luck Egalitarianism and Climate Change. Canadian Journal of Philosophy Supplementary, 31, 279–309.Google Scholar
Knight, C. (2009). Luck Egalitarianism. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, C. (2013). What Is Grandfathering? Environmental Politics, 22, 410–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, C. (2014). Moderate Emissions Grandfathering. Environmental Values, 23, 571–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, A. (2007). The Case for Contraction and Convergence. In Surviving Climate Change: The Struggle to Avert Global Catastrophe, ed. Levene, M. and Cromwell, D.. London: Pluto Press, pp. 29–58.Google Scholar
Meyer, L. H. (2004). Compensating Wrongless Historical Emissions of Greenhouse Gases. Ethical Perspectives, 11, 20–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, L. H., and Roser, D. (2010). Climate Justice and Historical Emissions. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 13, 229–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, L. H., and Sanklecha, P. (2011). Individual Expectations and Climate Justice. Analyse & Kritik, 33, 449–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, L. H., and Sanklecha, P. (2014). How Legitimate Expectations Matter in Climate Justice. Politics, Philosophy, and Economics, 13, 369–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D. (2008). Global Justice and Climate Change: How Should Responsibilities be Distributed? The Tanner Lecture on Human Values. Tsinghua University, Beijing, March 24–25. URL: http://tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/m/Miller_08.pdf.Google Scholar
Moellendorf, D. (2011). Common Atmospheric Ownership and Equal Emissions Entitlements. In The Ethics of Global Climate Change, ed. Arnold, D. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 104–23.Google Scholar
Müller, O. (2009). Mikro-Zertifikate. Für Gerechtigkeit unter Luftverschmutzern. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosophie, 95, 167–98.Google Scholar
Neumayer, E. (2000). In Defense of Historic Accountability for Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Ecological Economics, 33, 185–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posner, E., and Weisbach, D. (2010). Climate Change Justice. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Riser, V. (2006). Disfranchisement, the U.S. Constitution, and the Federal Courts: Alabama’s 1901 Constitutional Convention Debates the Grandfather Clause. American Journal of Legal History, 48, 237–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuessler, R. (2011). Climate Justice: A Question of Historic Responsibility? Journal of Global Ethics, 7, 261–78.Google Scholar
Schuessler, R. (2013). Equal Emissions per Capita: A Moral Defense. Discussion paper, University of Bayreuth, Germany.Google Scholar
Shields, L. (2012). The Prospects for Sufficientarianism. Utilitas, 24, 101–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starkey, R. (2011). Assessing Common(s) Arguments for an Equal per Capita Allocation. The Geographical Journal, 177, 112–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, N. (2007). The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tol, R. (2009). The Stern Review: A Deconstruction. Energy Policy, 37, 1032–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weishaar, S. (2007). The European Emissions Trading System and State Aid: An Assessment of the Grandfathering Allocation Method and the Performance Standard Rate System. European Competition Law Review, 28, 371–81.Google Scholar
Wilson, C. (2007). The Moral Epistemology of Locke’s ‘Essay’. In The Cambridge Companion to Locke’s “Essay Concerning Human Understanding,” ed. Newman, L.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 381–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5
- Cited by