Sharing the Responsibilities of Dealing with Climate Change:

Interpreting the Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities

Dan Turton, David Eng, Ramon Das

Victoria University of Wellington

Climate Change Problem

• Problem of Global Commons – Fair distribution of responsibilities to deal with a threat to a common good

• Climate Change Problem:– Increasing concentrations of Atmospheric GHGs– Rapid environmental changes e.g. temperature – Likely to result in devastating consequences for

humankind

• Requires reducing GHGs 350-450 ppm by 2020

Good Solution to the Problem

• Policies for distributing ethical responsibility when there is a common global good– Criteria

• Fair• Justified• Achievable

Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities

• Principle 7 of Rio Declaration on Environment and Sustainability (1992)

• “In view of the different contributions to global environmental degradation, States have common but differentiated responsibilities.

• The developed countries acknowledge the responsibility that they bear in the international pursuit of sustainable development in view of the pressures their societies place on the global environment and of the technologies and financial resources they command.”

Common Approaches: Polluter Pays Principle

• Those who pollute should pay

• Justification – If an agent causes harm, they are responsible for remedying harm

• Example Policies– Cap and trade on GHG emissions

• Absolute cap (350-450 ppm) distributed on GHG emissions/capita

– Taxes directly linked to polluting over quota

Common Approaches: Polluter Pays Principle

• 2 Variations– Full liability – PPP regardless of whether the agent

knows that the actions are harmful• Problems:

1. Inter-generational problem – Unfair to hold current generation accountable for actions of previous generation

2. Unfair to assign moral responsibility when agents aren’t aware of harmful consequences of their actions

– Conditional liability (CPPP) – PPP conditional on ‘knowing’

• Practical problem - Fair but insufficient distribution of responsibilities to solve problem

Common Approaches: Beneficiary Pays Principle

• Those who benefit should pay• Justification

– if an agent benefits at a cost to others, the agent should pay for those costs

– Avoids inter-generational problem facing PPP

• Example policies– Developed countries that have benefited from GHG

emissions should pay for majority of mitigation and adaptation costs

– Taxes on profits from polluting

Common Approaches: Beneficiary Pays Principle

• Problems– Not feasible – how do we distinguish when

individuals benefit based on polluting versus non-polluting activities?

– Unfair - Ignores knowing polluters– Non-identity problem

Common Approaches: Ability to Pay Principle

• Those who have the ability should pay• Justification

– ‘Drowning child example’– Addresses problem of historical polluting

• Example policies– Richer states should contribute to an international

fund that helps poorer countries adapt to climate change and industrialise in a more sustainable way

– Potential ability threshold band - annual per capita GDP(PPP) is above $4,000-5,000 (International $)

Common Approaches: Ability to Pay Principle

• Problem:– In certain cases, APP assigns moral

responsibility to the wrong agents and ignores other morally relevant factors

• Knowing polluters

Summary of Common Approaches

• Individual Principles– Each fails to capture a moral dimension of the Climate

Change Problem

• PPP– Suffers from a dilemma about historical polluting

• BPP– Ignores knowing polluters and measurement problem

• APP– Unfairly assigns responsibility to those who are

innocent and have the ability when others are morally culpable

Hybrid Approaches

• “The developed countries acknowledge the responsibility that they bear in the international pursuit of sustainable development in view of the pressures their societies place on the global environment and of the technologies and financial resources they command.”

• PPP and APP (Caney, OXFAM AFI, and Our Account)

Our Hybrid Account

• Hybrid of CPPP and APP– CPPP – it is wrong to knowingly pollute over

the quota, but only if the citizens of a state meet a basic level of welfare (APP)

– APP – states, whose citizens exceed a certain basic level of welfare, have a responsibility to mitigate and help other countries adapt to climate change

Our Hybrid Account

Justification:1) States have…

a) A primary responsibility – to ensure a basic level of welfare for their citizens, and…

b) A secondary responsibility – to ensure the same basic level of welfare for all people

2) Wrong to knowingly pollute

3) 1a overrides 2 – if the citizens of a state do not meet a basic level of welfare, it is permissible to knowingly pollute…

How Our Account Works

Meets minimum ability (welfare) threshold?

Moral responsibility to deal with its own culpable GHG emitting

(CPPP)

Moral responsibility to deal with non-

culpable historical GHG emissions

(APP)

Moral responsibility to pursue a minimally decent quality of life for its citizens (APP)

Yes Yes

No

Policies should allow for

increase in GHG

emissions, but only in order to

increase the well-being of

citizens

Policies should incentivise reduction of GHG emissions to safe levels

Policies should ensure

contribution to an international fund that helps

poorer countries adapt to climate

change and industrialised in

a more sustainable way