Climatic Change

, Volume 81, Issue 3–4, pp 223–246 | Cite as

A normative ethical framework in climate change



The article spells out four domains of international distributive justice and the consequent criteria of equity, the purpose being to identify a pluralistic normative ethical framework for climate mitigation and adaptation strategies. Justice and equity should play a major role in favouring collective action against climate change, because the more the various dimensions of such action are just, the more any international climate initiative is feasible in principle. As far as mitigation is concerned, the definition of a just initial allocation of endowments focuses on the criterion of differentiated equality, taking account of undeserved inequalities as suggested by Rawls’ theory of justice as fairness. With regard to the subsequent exchange of endowments, the Pareto principle, supplemented by the envy-freeness one, is a viable option. Possibly a sound reference for the just financing of adaptation activities is the criterion of differentiated historical responsibility, backed by Rawls’ theory of justice as fairness. As regards the allocation of adaptation resources, the criterion of lack of human security, as substantiated in Sen’s capability approach, seems promising.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adger WN (1999) Social vulnerability to climate change and extremes in coastal Vietnam. World Dev 27:249–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adger WN, Kelly PM (1999) Social vulnerability to climate change and the architecture of entitlements. Mitig Adapt Strategies Glob Chang 4:253–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adger WN, Paavola J, Huq S, Mace MJ (2006) Toward justice in adaptation to climate change. In: Adger WN, Huq S, Mace MJ, Paavola J (eds) Fairness in adaptation to climate change. MIT, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  4. Albin C (2001) Getting to fairness: negotiations over global public goods. Discussion Papers in Diplomacy, Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’Google Scholar
  5. Aldy JE, Orszag PR, Stiglitz JE (2001) Climate change: an agenda for global collective action. Pew Center on Global Climate Change, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  6. Ali A (2001) A conceptual framework for environmental justice based on shared but differentiated responsibilities. CSERGE Working Paper EDM 01–02, CSERGE, NorwichGoogle Scholar
  7. Alkire S (2002) A conceptual framework for human security. CRISE Working Paper #2Google Scholar
  8. Arnsperger C (1994) Envy-freeness and distributive justice. J Econ Surv 8:155–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ashton J, Wang X (2003) Equity and climate: in principle and practice. Beyond Kyoto Series, Pew Center on Global Climate Change, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  10. Aslam AM (2002) Equal per capita entitlements: a key to global participation on climate change? In: Baumert KA, Blanchard O, Llosa S, Perkaus J (eds) Building on the Kyoto protocol: options for protecting the climate, World Resources Institute, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  11. Athanasiou T, Baer P (2002) Dead heat. Global justice and global warming. Seven Stories, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Baer P (2002) Equity, greenhouse gas emissions, and global common resources. In: Schneider SH (ed) Climate change policy: a survey, Island, Washington, District of Columbia, p 393Google Scholar
  13. Baer P (2006) Adaptation: who pays whom? In: Adger WN, Huq S, Mace MJ, Paavola J (eds) Fairness in adaptation to climate change. MIT, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  14. Baer P, Harte J, Herzog A, Hultman N, Raymond L (2000) Equal per capita emission rights: the key to a viable climate change policy. RAEL, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  15. Beitz CR (2000) Rawls’s law of peoples. Ethics 110:669–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Benestad O (1994) Energy needs and CO2 emissions. Energy Policy 22:725–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Bodansky D (2002) U.S. climate policy after Kyoto: elements for success. Policy Brief 15, Carnegie Endowments for International Peace, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  18. Bohm P (2000) International greenhouse gas emission trading – with special reference to the Kyoto protocol. In: Carraro C (ed) Equity and efficiency in climate change policy. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  19. Brooks N (2003) Vulnerability, risk and adaptation: a conceptual framework. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, Working Paper 38Google Scholar
  20. Brooks N, Adger WN, Kelly PM (2005) The determinants of vulnerability and adaptive capacity at the national level and the implications for adaptation. Glob Environ Change 15:151–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Caney S (2001) International distributive justice. Polit Stud 49:974–997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Carraro C, Buchner B (2002) Equity, development and climate change policy. In: Carraro C, Galeotti M, Kemfert C, Buchner B (eds) Climate Change Policy Regimes, International Trade and Economic Growth. Bruxelles, CEPS–ESRI Collaboration StudiesGoogle Scholar
  23. Cohen GA (1993) Equality of what? On welfare, goods and capabilities. In: Nussbaum MC, Sen AK (eds) The quality of life. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  24. Criqui P, Mima S, Viguier P (1999) Marginal abatement cost of CO2 emission reductions, geographical flexibility and concrete ceilings: an assessment using the POLES model. Energy Policy 27:585–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cullen B (1992) Philosophical theories of justice. In: Scherer KR (ed) Justice: interdisciplinary perspectives, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, p 15Google Scholar
  26. DeCanio SJ, Niemann P (2006) Equity effects of alternative assignments of global environmental rights. Ecol Econ 56:546–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Eyckmans J, Schokkaert E (2003) An “ideal” normative theory for greenhouse negotiations. Working paper, Katholieke Universiteit, LeuvenGoogle Scholar
  28. Gardiner SM (2004) Ethics and global climate change. Ethics 114:555–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gauthier D (1986) Morals by agreement. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  30. Grubb M (1995) Seeking fair weather: ethics and the international debate on climate change. Int Aff 71(3):463–496Google Scholar
  31. Gupta J (2000) On behalf of my delegation. A survival guide for Developing Country Climate Negotiators. Center for Sustainable Development in the America, Washington, International Institute for Sustainable Development, WinnipegGoogle Scholar
  32. Hay AM (1995) Concepts of equity, fairness and justice in geographical studies. Trans Inst Br Geogr NS 20:500–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Helm C (2003) Fair division of common property resources when monetary compensations are possible. Working paper, School of Business and Economics, Humboldt University, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  34. Helm C, Simonis UE (2000) Distributive justice in international environmental policy – theoretical foundation and exemplary formulation. Working paper, Science Center, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  35. Huq S, Reid H (2004) Mainstreaming adaptation in development. IDS Bull 35:15–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – IPCC (2001a) Climate change 2001: synthesis report – summary for policymakers. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  37. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – IPCC (2001b) Climate change 2001: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability – summary for policymakers. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  38. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – IPCC (2001c) Climate change 2001: mitigation – summary for policymakers. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  39. Kelly P, Adger WN (2000) Theory and practice in assessing vulnerability to climate change and facilitating adaptation. Clim Change 47:325–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. King G, Murray CJL (2001–2002) Rethinking human security. Polit Sci Q 116:585–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Konow J (2003) Which is the fairest one of all? A positive analysis of justice theories. J Econ Lit XLI:1188–1239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Miller D (1988) The ethical significance of nationality. Ethics 98:647–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Miller D (1995) On nationality. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  44. Muller B (1999) Justice in global warming negotiations. How to obtain a procedurally fair compromise. Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, LondonGoogle Scholar
  45. Muller B (2001a) Fair compromise in a morally complex world. In: Proceedings Equity and Global Climate Change Conference, The Pew Center on Global Climate Change, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  46. Muller B (2001b) Varieties of distributive justice in climate change. Clim Change 48:273–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Muller B (2002) Equity in climate change: the great divide. Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, LondonGoogle Scholar
  48. Neumayer E (2000) In defence of historical accountability for greenhouse gas emissions. Ecol Econ 33:185–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Nordhaus WD (1999) Global public goods and the problem of global warming. Annual Lecture, The Institute d’Economie Industrielle (IDEI), ToulouseGoogle Scholar
  50. Nozick R (1974) Anarchy, state and utopia. Basic Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  51. O’Brien K, Eriksen S, Schjolden A, Nygaard, L (2004) What’s in a world? Conflicting interpretations of vulnerability in climate change research. CICERO Working Paper 2004:04, CICERO, OsloGoogle Scholar
  52. Ott HE, Sachs W (2000) Ethical aspects of emission trading. Wuppertal Paper Nr. 110, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, WuppertalGoogle Scholar
  53. Paavola J (2005) Seeking justice: international environmental governance and climate change. Globalizations 2:309–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Paavola J, Adger WN (2002) Justice and adaptation to climate change. Research Working Paper 23, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change, NorwichGoogle Scholar
  55. Paavola J, Adger WN (2006) Fair adaptation to climate change. Ecol Econ 56:594–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Page E (1999) Intergenerational justice and climate change. Polit Stud 47:53–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pan J (2003) Emission rights and their transferability: equity concerns over climate change mitigation. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 3:1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Panayotou T, Sachs JD, Zwane AP (2002) Compensation for ‘meaningful participation’ in climate change control: a modest proposal and empirical analysis. J Environ Econ Manage 43:437–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Parikh J (2000) Viewpoint: inequity, a root cause of climate change. Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, MumbaiGoogle Scholar
  60. Paris R (2001) Human security. Paradigm shift or hot air? Int Secur 26:87–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pogge T (2004) The incoherence between Rawls’s theories of justice. Fordham Law Rev 72:1739–1759Google Scholar
  62. Rawls J (1971) A theory of justice. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  63. Rawls J (1999) The law of peoples. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  64. Rayner S, Malone E (1998) Why study human choice and climate change? In: Rayner S, Malone E (eds) Human choice and climate change. Volume 1. The societal framework. Battelle, ColumbusGoogle Scholar
  65. Richards M (2003) Poverty reduction, equity and climate change: global governance synergies or contradictions? Overseas Development Institute, LondonGoogle Scholar
  66. Ringius L, Frederiksen P (2002) Burden sharing in the context of global climate change. NERI Technical Report, no. 424, National Environmental Research Institute, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  67. Rose A, Steven SB, Edmonds J, Wise M (1998) International equity and differentiation in global warming policies: an application to tradable emission permits. Environ Resour Econ 12:25–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Schokkaert E (1992) The economics of distributive justice, welfare and freedoms. In: Scherer KR (ed) Justice: interdisciplinary perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  69. Sen AK (1970) Collective choice and social welfare. North-Holland, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  70. Sen AK (1979) The welfare basis of real income comparison: a survey. J Econ Lit 17:1–45Google Scholar
  71. Sen AK (1987) On ethics and economics. Basic Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  72. Sen AK (1990) Justice: means versus freedoms. Philos Public Aff 19:111–121Google Scholar
  73. Sen AK (1999) Development as freedom. Anchor, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  74. Shogren J, Toman M (2000) Climate change policy. RFF Discussion Paper 00–22, Resources for the Future, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  75. Shue H (1992) The unavoidability of justice. In: Hurrell A, Kingsbury B (eds) The international politics of the environment. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 373Google Scholar
  76. Shue H (1993) Subsistence emissions and luxury emissions. Law Policy 15:39–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Shue H (1999) Global environment and international inequality. Int Aff 75:531–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Shue H (2001) Climate. In: Jamieson D (ed) A companion to environmental ethics. Blackwell, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  79. Shukla PR (1999) Justice, equity and efficiency in climate change: a developing country perspective. In: Toth F (ed) Fair weather? Equity concerns in climate change. Earthscan, London (also: Working paper e2 Analytics)Google Scholar
  80. Tamir Y (1993) Liberal nationalism. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  81. Tata Energy Research Institute (TERI) (1999) Climate of concern – bridging the divide. Tata Energy Research Institute, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  82. United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, Stockholm, Sweden, June 5–16, 1972, Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, UN Doc. A/CONF.48/14 [Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment]Google Scholar
  83. Varian HR (1974) Equity, envy and efficiency. J Econ Theory 9:63–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Varian HR (1976) Two problems in the theory of fairness. J Pub Econ 5:249–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Weitzman ML (1974) Price vs. quantities. Rev Econ Stud 41:477–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di Sociologia e Ricerca SocialeUniversità degli Studi di Milano BicoccaMilanItaly
  2. 2.Department of GeographyKing’s College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations