Climatic Change

, Volume 130, Issue 3, pp 335–345 | Cite as

Wants and needs in mitigation policy

Article

Abstract

Disagreements about morally appropriate mitigation policies arise in part from implicit disagreements about the nature and moral significance of needs. One key question is what, if anything, distinguishes “needs” from “mere wants.” One approach, prominent in economics and implemented in existing integrated assessment models of climate change, rejects a hard distinction between needs and wants. An alternative approach, prominent in the philosophical literature on needs, identifies needs with the requirements for autonomous agency, which is the capacity to set and pursue one’s own goals. A second key question is in what sense, if any, the satisfaction of needs should take precedence over the satisfaction of wants. Those who reject the distinction between wants and needs can say only that some desires should be weighted more heavily than others. Those who endorse the distinction can say that, given certain ethical assumptions, it is wrong to frustrate one person’s needs in order to satisfy others’ mere wants. Thus, rejecting the distinction between wants and needs tends to justify less aggressive mitigation policies, in which satisfying the so-called “wants” of present generations compensates for frustrating the so-called “needs” of future generations. Endorsing the distinction between wants and needs, along with certain ethical assumptions, tends to justify more aggressive mitigation policies. Both positions are intellectually defensible; understanding them helps illuminate disagreements over mitigation policy.

Keywords

Ethics Justice Mitigation Needs Capabilities 

References

  1. Agarwal A, Narain S (1991) Global warming in an unequal world: a case of environmental colonialism. Centre for Science and Environment, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  2. Anthoff D, Hepburn C, Tol RSJ (2009) Equity weighting and the marginal damage costs of climate change. Ecol Econ 68:836–849. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.06.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brandt RB (1979) A Theory of the Good and the Right. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Braybrooke D (1987) Meeting Needs. Princeton Univ Press, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brock G (2005) Needs and global justice. In: Reader S (ed) The philosophy of need. Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, pp 51–72Google Scholar
  6. Brooks T (2012) Climate change and negative duties. Polit 32:1–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9256.2011.01419.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Broome J (1994) Discounting the future. Philos Public Aff 23:128–156. doi: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.1994.tb00008.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Broome J (2012) Climate matters: ethics in a warming world. W.W. Norton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Caney S (2009a) Climate change and the future: discounting for time, wealth, and risk. J Soc Philos 40:163–186. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9833.2009.01445.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Caney S (2009b) Justice and the distribution of greenhouse gas emissions. J Glob Ethics 5:125–146. doi: 10.1080/17449620903110300 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Christman J (2011) Autonomy in moral and political philosophy. In: Zalta EN (ed). Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2011/entries/autonomy-moral/
  12. Cowen T, Parfit D (1992) Against the social discount rate. In: Laslett P, Fishkin J S (eds) Justice between age groups and generations. Yale Univ Press, New Haven, pp 144–161Google Scholar
  13. Doyal L, Gough I (1984) A theory of human needs. Crit Soc Policy 4:6–38. doi: 10.1177/026101838400401002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frankfurt HG (1984) Necessity and desire. Philos Phenomenol Res 45:1–13. doi: 10.2307/2107323 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gardiner SM (2004) Ethics and global climate change. Ethics 114:555–600. doi: 10.1086/382247 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gardiner SM (2011) A perfect moral storm: the ethical tragedy of climate change. Oxford Univ Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hayward T (2012) Climate change and ethics. Nature Clim Change 2:843–848. doi: 10.1038/nclimate1615 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Maslow AH (1943) A theory of human motivation. Psychol Rev 50:370–396. doi: 10.1037/h0054346 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nolt J (2011) Greenhouse gas emission and the domination of posterity. In: Arnold F G (ed) The ethics of global climate change. Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, pp 60–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nordhaus WD (2008) A question of balance: weighing the options on global warming policies.Yale Univ Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  21. Nordhaus WD (2010) Economic aspects of global warming in a post-Copenhagen environment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:11721–11726. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1005985107 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Page E (1999) Intergenerational justice and climate change. Polit Stud 47:53–66. doi: 10.1111/1467-9248.00187 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Parfit D (1984) Reasons and persons. Oxford Univ Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  24. Posner EA, Weisbach DA (2010) Climate change justice. Princeton Univ Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  25. Reader S (2005) The philosophy of need. Cambridge Univ Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  26. Sen A (1999) Development as freedom. Random House, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Schuppert F (submitted for this issue) Intergenerational resource justice: protecting ecosystem processes in an age of climate change. Clim ChangGoogle Scholar
  28. Shue H (1993) Subsistence emissions and luxury emissions. Law Policy 15:39–59. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9930.1993.tb00093.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shue H (2010) Deadly delays, saving opportunities: creating a more dangerous world? In: Gardiner S M, Caney S, Jamieson D, Shue H (eds) Climate ethics: essential readings. Oxford Univ Press, New York, pp 146–162Google Scholar
  30. Stern N (2007) The economics of climate change: the Stern review. Cambridge Univ Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sugden R (2003) Reference-dependent subjective expected utility. J Econ Theory 111:172–191. doi: 10.1016/S0022-0531(03)00082-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Thomson G (2005) Fundamental needs. In: Reader S (ed) The philosophy of need. Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, pp 187–208Google Scholar
  33. Tol RSJ (2009) The economic effects of climate change. J Econ Perspect 23:29–51. doi: 10.1257/jep.23.2.29 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Traxler M (2002) Fair chore division for climate change. Soc Theory Pract 28:101–134. doi: 10.5840/soctheorpract20022814 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Weitzman ML (2012) GHG targets as insurance against catastrophic climate damages. J Public Econ Theory 14:221–244. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9779.2011.01539.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wiggins D (1987) Needs, values, truth: essays in the philosophy of value. Oxford Univ Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of Alabama at BirminghamBirminghamUnited States

Personalised recommendations