Delegates at Copenhagen will be bitterly divided on how the cost of tackling climate change should be shared between advanced and developing countries. After all, the concept of ideal fairness is highly controversial: philosophers have debated it for centuries. When it comes to a deal on global emissions, is such a thing even possible?
Developing countries (DCs) make two arguments about fair burden-sharing. The first is based on historic responsibility for the accumulated stock of carbon emitted by advanced countries (ACs). The ACs have used up a large part of the safe carbon-absorbing capacity of the atmosphere and should compensate the DCs for this—a persuasive point. Even so, it runs up against some powerful moral intuitions. The ACs did not expropriate knowingly. They acted in the belief, universally held until recently, that the atmosphere was an infinite resource. Moreover, the expropriators are mostly dead and gone. Should their descendants be held responsible for acts they did not themselves commit? True, ACs benefit hugely from their past carbon-intensive industrialisation, but should they be liable for all of this?
If you are a subscriber, please log in »
This article is available to subscribers only
Subscribing to Prospect is the most reliable and convenient way to receive the magazine every month, and offers the best value.Subscription Types:
Online
An online subscription offers you complete and unlimited access to the entire website, including our searchable archive of every back issue of Prospect, and a PDF edition of each new issue: all this for just £20 per year. Purchase an online subscription »Renewal
Renew an existing subscription »Institutional access
If you are a library, business organisation or any other large institution that needs a multi-user licence, you can obtain institutional access.
Share
Subscribe to post comments
Print
