Economics Dictionary of Arguments

Home Screenshot Tabelle Begriffe

 
Climate justice: Climate justice advocates for equitable treatment of all people and communities affected by climate change, emphasizing fair distribution of its burdens and benefits. It addresses social, economic, and political inequalities, highlighting the disproportionate impact of climate change on marginalized or vulnerable groups. See also Climate change, Climate damages, Climate costs.
_____________
Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments.

 
Author Concept Summary/Quotes Sources

Cosmopolitanism on Climate Justice - Dictionary of Arguments

Norgaard I 325
Climate Justice/Cosmopolitanism: The cosmopolitan approach argues that obligations of justice apply across borders as well as within, deriving these obligations in some cases from actual causal interrelationships (e.g. Pogge 2002)(1), sometimes from universal extension of the same egalitarian premises that ground nationally entered theories of justice (Singer 1972(2); Caney 2005b(3)), or both (Beitz 1979(4); Moellendorf 2002(5)). Rejection of such obligation typically relies on the argument that either a shared culture (e.g. Rawls 1999)(6), shared nationality (Miller 1995)(7) or a shared sovereignty (Nagel 2005)(8) is required for the existence of obligations of justice, though proponents of such views —‘communitarians’ taken loosely—do usually advocate beneficence towards persons outside the community.
Norgaard I 326
Climate Justice/Climate Costs/VsRawls/Cosmopolitism: While not all the philosophers who have written on climate change are otherwise engaged in debates about cosmopolitanism (…) most conclude that claims of justice do apply to the international distribution of the costs and benefits of climate policy. However, many authors have still found it necessary to engage John Rawls's famous dismissal of cosmopolitan justice claims (Rawls 1999)(6); most conclude that the inescapable causal relationships of climate change render Rawls's position no longer supportable, if it ever was (see e.g. Vanderheiden 2008)(9). >Climate Costs/Cosmopolitanism
, >Climate Costs/Shue/Singer.
Cosmopolitanism/Climate Costs/VsRawls/Nagel/Miller/Rawls: Rawls argued that the social ties required to make possible a contractarian theory of justice, like that of ‘original position’ bargaining, do not exist across national borders, and that only ‘well‐ordered societies’—in practice, nations—could plausibly be bound by such a standard of justice. The theories of Nagel and Miller make similar claims on slightly different grounds.
VsRawls: (…) such an argument fails when the status quo involves the imposition of significant cross‐border harms, as from greenhouse pollution; any rejection of international justice claims therefore becomes a de facto endorsement of the right to do harm to non‐citizens, which Rawls did not in fact endorse. And of course the fact that, considered as a resource, the atmosphere is not territorially bound (that is, it is a globally ‘open access’ resource) implies a need for global cooperation, providing further justification for cosmopolitan obligations (Vanderheiden 2008(9); Moellendorf 2009 (10)).

>Emission permits, >Emission reduction credits, >Emission targets, >Emissions, >Emissions trading, >Climate change, >Climate damage, >Energy policy, >Clean Energy Standards, >Climate data, >Climate history, >Climate justice, >Climate periods, >Climate targets, >Climate impact research, >Carbon price, >Carbon price coordination, >Carbon price strategies, >Carbon tax, >Carbon tax strategies.

1. Pogge, T. 2002. World Poverty and Human Rights. Cambridge: Polity Press.
2. Singer, P. 1972. Famine, affluence, and morality. Philosophy & Public Affairs 1: 229–43.
3. Caney, S. 2005b. Justice beyond Borders: A Global Political Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. Beitz, C. R. 1979. Political Theory and International Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
5. Moellendorf, D. 2002. Cosmopolitan Justice. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
6. Rawls, J. 1999. The Law of Peoples. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7. Miller, D. 1995. On Nationality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8. Nagel, T. 2005. The problem of global justice. Philosophy & Public Affairs 33: 113–47.
9. Vanderheiden, S. 2008. Atmospheric Justice: A Political Theory of Climate Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10. Moellendorf, D. 2009. Global Inequality Matters. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.

Baer, Paul: “International Justice”, In: John S. Dryzek, Richard B. Norgaard, David Schlosberg (eds.) (2011): The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

_____________
Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments
The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
Cosmopolitanism
Norgaard I
Richard Norgaard
John S. Dryzek
The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society Oxford 2011


Send Link

Authors A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   Z  


Concepts A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   Z