Moral Constraints on Climate Policy
What moral constraints, if any, should guide climate policy? Many policies proposed to combat dangerous climate change themselves raise ethical questions.
Emissions Trading Schemes
For example, many criticise emissions trading schemes on a variety of different grounds. I have explored the case against emissions trading in the following:
[1] ‘Emissions Trading: Unethical, Ineffective and Unjust?’ (with Cameron Hepburn) in Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement vol.69 (2011), pp.201-234. This has been reprinted in Philosophy and the Environment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011) edited by Anthony O’Hear.
[2] 'Markets, Morality and Climate Change: What, if anything, is Wrong with Emissions Trading?', New Political Economy vol.15 no.2 (2010), pp.197-224.
[3] 'Giustizia, Morale e Mercato delle Emissioni’, Ragion Pratica vol.32 June (2009), pp.203-227 [English title Justice, Morality and Carbon Trading]. A revised version was reprinted as 'Gerechtigkeit, Moral und Emissionshandel', in Demokratie und Gerechtigkeit in Verteilungskonflikten (NOMOS Verlag, 2012) edited by Regina Kreide, Claudia Landwehr, Katrin Tones, pp.213-244.
I argue in these that the two key considerations are by which mitigation policies should be judged are: (i) whether they reduce emissions and (ii) whether they distribute the burdens equitably and respect people's rights. In [1]-[3] I consider additional moral criteria that have been invoked in arguments against emissions trading schemes and argue that they do not give us reason to reject such schemes.
Biofuels
[4] Some propose use biofuels (like bioethanol or biodiesel) as substitutes for fossil fuels in order to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases. At the same time the use of biofuels has also been heavily criticised. What principles should guide biofuels policy? I was a member of a Nuffield Council on Bioethics working party that produced a report on Biofuels: Ethical Issues. The report can be found here.
Emissions Trading Schemes
For example, many criticise emissions trading schemes on a variety of different grounds. I have explored the case against emissions trading in the following:
[1] ‘Emissions Trading: Unethical, Ineffective and Unjust?’ (with Cameron Hepburn) in Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement vol.69 (2011), pp.201-234. This has been reprinted in Philosophy and the Environment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011) edited by Anthony O’Hear.
[2] 'Markets, Morality and Climate Change: What, if anything, is Wrong with Emissions Trading?', New Political Economy vol.15 no.2 (2010), pp.197-224.
[3] 'Giustizia, Morale e Mercato delle Emissioni’, Ragion Pratica vol.32 June (2009), pp.203-227 [English title Justice, Morality and Carbon Trading]. A revised version was reprinted as 'Gerechtigkeit, Moral und Emissionshandel', in Demokratie und Gerechtigkeit in Verteilungskonflikten (NOMOS Verlag, 2012) edited by Regina Kreide, Claudia Landwehr, Katrin Tones, pp.213-244.
I argue in these that the two key considerations are by which mitigation policies should be judged are: (i) whether they reduce emissions and (ii) whether they distribute the burdens equitably and respect people's rights. In [1]-[3] I consider additional moral criteria that have been invoked in arguments against emissions trading schemes and argue that they do not give us reason to reject such schemes.
Biofuels
[4] Some propose use biofuels (like bioethanol or biodiesel) as substitutes for fossil fuels in order to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases. At the same time the use of biofuels has also been heavily criticised. What principles should guide biofuels policy? I was a member of a Nuffield Council on Bioethics working party that produced a report on Biofuels: Ethical Issues. The report can be found here.