White Paper on the Ethical Dimensions of Climate ChangeDonald Brown • Nancy Tuana • Marilyn Averill • Paul Baer • Rubens Born Carlos Eduardo Lessa Brandão •�•Rober��Frodeman•Chris��iaanHogenhuis Robert�� FFrodemman • Chhrist��iaan HHoggenhhuis Thhommas HHeyd • Johhn Lemmons • Robert�� McKinst��ry • Mark Lut��es Benit��o Müller • José Domminggos Gonzalez Migguez • Mohhan MunasinghgheMaria Silvia Muylaert�� de Araujo • CarlosNobre•KonradO����Carlos Nobre • Konrad OttO���� Jouni Paavola • Chris��ianoPiresdeCampos•LuizPinguelliRosaChhrist��iano Pires de Campmpos • uelliRosaLuiz Pingguelli RosaJon Rosales • Adamm Rose • Edward Wells • Laura West��raEthical Dimensions of Climate Change Rock Ethics Institute, Secretariat, Penn State UniversityPenn St��at��e Inst��it��ut��es of th��he Environmment��Pennsylvania Consort��iumm for Int��erdiscipplinary Environmment��al PolicyBrazilian FForumm on Climmat��e ChhanggeCent��er for Eth��hics, Universit��y of Mont��anaCent��re for Apppplied Eth��hics, Cardiff Universit��yCent��re for Global Eth��hics, Birmminghghamm Universit��yCoordinat��ion of Post�� Graduat��e Proggramms in Enggineeringg of FFederal Universit��y of Rio de Janeiro–Thhe Energgy Planningg ProggrammEcoEquit��yGlobal Ecologgical Int��eggrit��y GrouppIUCN Environmment��al Law Commmmission–Eth��hics Sppecialist�� GrouppInt��ernat��ional Virt��ual Inst��it��ut��e of Global Chhangge, Universit��y of Rio de JaneiroMunasinghghe Inst��it��ut��e for Developmpment��New Direct��ions: Science, HHummanit��ies, PolicyOOxford Climmat��e PolicySust��ainabilit��y Researchh Inst��it��ut��e, Universit��y of LeedsTyndall Cent��re for Climmat��e Chhangge Researchh Contact InformationRock Eth��hics Inst��it��ut��ehttp://rockethics.psu.edu/climateDonald A. BrownProject�� Coordinat��or, Collaborat��ive Proggramm on Eth��hical Dimmensions of Climmat��e ChhanggeClimmat��eEth��hics@commcast��.net��Nancy Tuana Direct��or, Rock Eth��hics Inst��it��ut��e Secret��ariat��, Collaborat��ive Proggramm on Eth��hical Dimmensions of Climmat��e Chhangge rocketh��hics@ppsu.eduParticipating InstitutionsHistory of the ProgramThhe Proggramm on th��he Eth��hical Dimmensions of Climmat��e Chhangge was launchhed at�� 10th��h Conference of Part��ies t��o Unit��ed Nat��ions FFrammework Convent��ion on Climmat��e Chhangge th��hat�� was hheld in early Decemmber of 2004 in Buenos Aires, Arggent��ina. Thhe mmajor out��comme of th��his mmeet��ingg was Buenos Aires Declarat��ion on Eth��hical Dimmensions of Climmat��e Chhangge.The Program on the Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change Seeks to:• F Facilit��at��e exppress examminat��ion of eth��hical dimmensions of climmat��e chhangge ppart��icularly for th��hose issues ent��ailed by sppecific pposit��ions t��aken by ggovernmment��s, businesses, NGOOs, orgganizat��ions, or individuals on climmat��e chhangge ppolicy mmatt����ers; • Creat��e bett����er underst��andingg about�� eth��hical dimmensions of climmat��e chhangge ammongg mmakers and ggeneral ppublic; • Assure ppeopple around world, includingg mmost�� vulnerable climmat��e chhangge, ppart��icippat��e in any eth��hical inquiry about�� respponses climmat��e chhangge; • Developp an int��erdiscipplinary apppproachh inquiry about�� eth��hical dimmensions of climmat��e chhangge and supppport�� ppublicat��ions exammine eth��hical dimmensions of climmat��e chhangge;• Make result��s of schholarshhipp on eth��hical dimmensions of climmat��e chhangge available and accessible mmakers, scient��ist��s, and cit��izen ggroupps;• Int��eggrat��e eth��hical analysis int��o work of oth��her inst��it��ut��ions enggagged in climmat��e chhangge includingg Int��erggovernmment��al Proggramm on Climmat��e Chhangge and Conference of Part��ies Unit��ed Nat��ions Conference on Climmat��e Chhangge. Further InformationFor mmore informmat��ion about�� pproggramm, includingg a biblioggraphphy on eth��hical dimmensions of climmat��e chhangge, visit�� Web sit��e at�� http://rockethics.psu.edu/climate.About UsEthical Dimensions of Climate Change ContentsPreamble 7 Aimms 7 Thhe Buenos Aires Declarat��ion 7 Init��ial Eth��hical Principples and Invest��iggat��ive Apppproachh 9Ethical Issue One: Responsibility for Damages 10 F Fact��ual Cont��ext�� 10 Relevant�� Climmat��e Chhangge Science 10 Dis��ribut��ion of HHarmms and Benefit��s 11 In��ernat��ional Neggot��iat��ions and Aggreemment��s 12 Eth��hical Analysis of Issue OOne 13 Issues t��o be Developped 15Ethical Issue Two: Atmospheric Targets 15 Fac��ual Cont��ext �� 15 Eth��hical Analysis of Issue Two 17 Issues be Developped 18Ethical Issue Three: Allocating Global Emissions among Nations 19 Fac��ual Cont��ext�� 19 Eth��hical Analysis of Issue Thhree 21 Issues be Developped 23Ethical Issue Four: The Use of Scientific Uncertainty in Policy Making 23 Fac��ual Cont��ext �� 23 Eth��hical Analysis of Issue FFour 26 Issues be Developped 28Ethical Issue Five: Cost to National Economies 2 9 Fac��ual Cont��ext �� 29 Eth��hical Analysis of Issue FFive 30 Issues be Developped 32Ethical Issue Six: Independent Responsibility to Act 32 Fac��ual Cont��ext �� 32 Eth��hical Analysis of Issue Six 33 Issues be Developped 345 ContentsEthical Issue Seven: Potential New Technologies 34 F Fact��ual Cont��ext �� 34 Eth��hical Analysis of Issue Seven 34Ethical Issue Eight: Procedural Fairness 3 5 Fac��ual Cont��ext �� 35 Eth��hical Analysis of Issue Eight gh�� 36 Issues t��o be Developped 37References 97 1 Thhe collaborat��ive pproggramm on th��he Eth��hical Dimmensions of Climmat��e Chhangge (EDCC) is an effort�� th��hat�� hhas ggrown out�� of collaborat��ion of mmany individuals and orgganizat��ions. It�� recoggnizes eth��hics shhould pplay a cent��ral role in ppolicy decisions are beingg mmade about�� climmat��e chhangge. Thhe Proggramm mmet�� for first�� t��imme at�� COOP-10 Buenos Aires and aggain at�� COOP-11 Mont��real. Proggramm reppresent��at��ives are Donald Brown, Climmat��eEth��hics@commcast��.net�� (Direct��or, Pennsylvania Consort��iumm for Int��erdiscipplinary Environmment��al Policy) and Nancy Tuana, nt��uana@ppsu.edu (Direct��or, Rock Eth��hics Inst��it��ut��e, Thhe Pennsylvania St��at��e Universit��y). Thhe orgganizat��ions include Rock Eth��hics Inst��it��ut��e, Penn St��at��e Universit��y, EDDC Proggramm Secret��ariat��; Pennsylvania Consort��iumm for Int��erdiscipplinary Environmment��al Policy; Penn St��at��e Inst��it��ut��es of Environmment��; Brazilian FForumm on Climmat��e Chhangge; Coordinat��ion of Post�� Graduat��e Proggramms in Enggineeringg of FFederal Universit��y of Rio de Janeiro–Thhe Energgy Planningg Proggramm; Global Ecologgical Int��eggrit��y Groupp; IUCN Commmmission on Environmment��al Law–Eth��hics Workingg Groupp; Cent��re for Apppplied Eth��hics at�� Cardiff Universit��y; Cent��re FFor Global Eth��hics at�� Birmminghghamm Universit��y; Tyndall Cent��re for Climmat��e Chhangge Researchh; EcoEquit��y; Cent��er for Eth��hics, Universit��y of Mont��ana; New Direct��ions: Science, HHummanit��ies, Policy; OOxford Climmat��e Policy; IVIG Int��ernat��ional Virt��ual Inst��it��ut��e on Global Chhangge-Universit��y of Rio de Janeiro; Munasinghghe Inst��it��ut��e for Developmpment��; and Sust��ainabilit��y Researchh Inst��it��ut��e, Universit��y of Leeds. In addit��ion t��o th��hese inst��it��ut��ions, nummerous individuals hhave cont��ribut��ed th��his Whhit��e Papper. A list�� of init��ial collaborat��ors can be found on Web sit��e at�� http://rockethics.psu.edu/climate. 2 a mmore compmprehhensive list�� of references on t��oppic see: http://rockethics.psu.edu/climate.White Paper on the Ethical Dimensions of Climate ChangeI. PreambleA. AimsThhis ppapper describes relevant�� fact��s, eth��hical quest��ions, and pprelimminary eth��hical analyses will const��it��ut��e init��ial phphase of Collaborat��ive Proggramm on Eth��hical Dimmensions of Climmat��e (EDCC).1 Thhis does not�� seek deal with��h mmatt����ers exhhaust��ively but�� rath��her int��ends creat��e a focus for init��ial inquiry and draw conclusions about�� eth��hical dimmensions of several climmat��e chhangge issues are ppossible at�� early st��agge of work of EDCC.2 By use of word “eth��hics” in is mmeant�� field of phphilosophphical inquiry exammines conceptp��s and th��heir empmploymment�� about�� whhat�� is rightgh�� and wrongg, obliggat��ory and non-obliggat��ory, and whhen respponsibilit��y shhould att����achh hhumman act��ions cause hharmm. reason, an eth��hical examminat��ion of climmat��e chhangge issues will expplore pprescriptp��ive assert��ions about�� whhat�� shhould be done about�� climmat��e chhangge rath��her th��han focus on descriptp��ions of scient��ific and econommic fact��s alone, alth��houghgh ggood eth��hical analyses of climmat��e chhangge issues mmust�� be sensit��ive fact��s framme any issue. reason, ident��ifies scient��ific, econommic, and social fact��s associat��ed with��h eachh issue about�� whhichh it�� draws eth��hical conclusions.B. The Buenos Aires DeclarationIn Decemmber 2004, Collaborat��ive Proggramm on Eth��hical Dimmensions of Climmat��e Chhangge adoptp��ed Buenos Aires Declarat��ion on HHumman Dimmensions of Climmat��e Chhangge at�� 10th��h Conference of Part��ies Unit��ed Nat��ions FFrammework Convent��ion on Climmat��e Chhangge (UNFFCCC). (compmplet��e t��ext�� of declarat��ion, see: http://rockethics.psu.edu/climate/declaration.pdf.) Thhis documment�� declared reflect��ion on eth��hical dimmensions of climmat��e chhangge was urggent�� because:• Unless eth��hical dimmensions are considered, int��ernat��ional commmmunit��y mmay chhoose respponses are eth��hically unsupppport��able or unjust��;Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change • Many pprofound eth��hical quest��ions are hhidden in scient��ific and econommic arggumment��s about�� various climmat��e chhangge ppolicy ppropposals;• An equit��able apppproachh t��o climmat��e chhangge is necessary overcomme barriers current��ly blockingg pproggress in int��ernat��ional neggot��iat��ions;• An eth��hically based gglobal consensus on climmat��e chhangge mmay pprevent�� furth��her dispparit��ies bet��ween richh and ppoor, and reduce ppot��ent��ial int��ernat��ional t��ension th��hat�� will arise fromm climmat��e-caused food and wat��er scarcit��ies and pperceived inequit��able use of th��he atm��mosphpheric commmmons as a carbon sink.Thhe Buenos Aires Declarat��ion ident��ified a nummber of sppecific eth��hical issues and associat��ed quest��ions concerningg climmat��e chhangge about�� whhichh exppress eth��hical reflect��ion is an int��ernat��ional impmperat��ive. Thhese issues are:1. Respponsibilit��y for Dammagges: Whho is eth��hically respponsible for consequences of climmat��e chhangge, is, whho is liable for burdens of: a. p prepparingg for and th��hen resppondingg climmat��e chhangge (i.e., adaptp��at��ion) orb. payingg for unavoided dammagges? 2. Atm��mosphpheric Targget��s: Whhat�� eth��hical pprincipples shhould gguide chhoice of sppecific climmat��e chhangge object��ives, includingg but�� not�� limmit��ed t��o, mmaximmumm hhumman-induced warmmingg and atm��mosphpheric ggreenhhouse ggas t��argget��s?3. Allocat��ingg GHHG Emmissions Reduct��ions: Whhat�� eth��hical shhould be followed in allocat��ingg respponsibilit��y ammongg ppeopple, orgganizat��ions, and ggovernmment��s at�� all levels eth��hically int��olerable impmpact��s fromm climmat��e chhangge? 4. Scient��ific Uncert��aint��y: Whhat�� is eth��hical siggnificance of need mmake climmat��e chhangge decisions in face of scient��ific uncert��aint��y?5. Cost�� Nat��ional Econommies: Is commmmonly used just��ificat��ion of nat��ional cost�� for delayingg or mminimmizingg climmat��e chhangge act��ion eth��hically just��ified? 6. Indeppendent�� Respponsibilit��y Act��: Is commmmonly used reason for delayingg or climmat��e chhangge act��ion any nat��ion need not�� act�� unt��il oth��hers aggree on act��ion, eth��hically just��ifiable? 7. Pot��ent��ial New Techhnologgies: Is arggumment�� we shhould mminimmize climmat��e chhangge act��ion unt��il new, less-cost��ly t��echhnologgies be invent��ed in fut��ure, eth��hically just��ifiable? 8. Procedural FFairness: Whhat�� of pprocedural just��ice shhould be followed assure fair reppresent��at��ion in decision mmakingg? Thhese issues were ident��ified in respponse act��ual issues in cont��ent��ion in climmat��e chhangge neggot��iat��ions. EDCC seeks focus on eth��hical issues eith��her in cont��ent��ion in climmat��e chhangge ppolicy-mmakingg or shhould be faced resolve issues in dispput��e. In th��his way, EDCC seeks avoid discussion of abst��ract�� eth��hical issues hhave litt����le resolve climmat��e chhangge dispput��es. Since int��ernat��ional climmat��e chhangge neggot��iat��ions beggan in lat��e 1980s, mmuchh of neggot��iat��ingg aggenda hhas focused on dut��ies of developped nat��ions reduce emmissions. FFor reason, mmost�� of eth��hical issues ident��ified by EDCC for analysis at�� early st��agge concern obliggat��ions of developped nat��ions reduce emmissions. In years ahhead, as issues on aggenda chhangge, EDCC 9 will ident��ify oth��her eth��hical issues relevant�� t��o th��he new neggot��iat��ingg aggenda includingg, but�� not�� limmit��ed t��o, issues about�� dut��ies of developpingg nat��ions. To do th��his EDCC will ppart��icippat��e in and mmonit��or climmat��e chhangge ppolicy formmat��ion in years ahhead.C. Initial Ethical Principles and Investigative Approach Thhis ppapper is writt����en for mmakers and environmment��al pprofessionals whho rout��inely in mmakingg. More det��ailed analyses of eth��hical quest��ions ident��ified hherein will be considered at�� lat��er st��agges of Proggramm includingg, but�� not�� limmit��ed an int��ernat��ional conference on eth��hical dimmensions of climmat��e chhangge. In way, EDCC will work deeppen and exppand eth��hical analyses of issues ppresent��ed hhere, or oth��her eth��hical issues th��hat�� arise in climmat��e chhangge formmat��ion in years ahhead. We will briefly ident��ify somme overarchhingg eth��hical pprincipples and basic rules of mmoralit��y informm our init��ial apppproachh.Given severit��y of impmpact�� be exppect��ed and ggiven likelihhood somme level of impmport��ant�� disruptp��ions in livingg condit��ions will occur for ggreat�� nummbers of ppeopple due climmat��e chhangge event��s, we cont��end th��here is sufficient�� converggence ammongg eth��hical mmake a nummber of concret��e recommmmendat��ions on hhow ggovernmment��s shhould act��, or ident��ify eth��hical pproblemms with��h pposit��ions t��aken by cert��ain ggovernmment��s, orgganizat��ions, or individuals FFor issues about�� whhichh we see subst��ant��ial disaggreemment�� ammongg eth��hicist��s, we will ident��ify th��hose compmpet��ingg eth��hical analyses.Fact��s about�� climmat��e chhangge and fundamment��al hhumman rightgh��s pprovide st��art��ingg ppoint�� for our eth��hical analysis. (Sachhs, 2005)A recent�� art��icle in resppect��ed scient��ific journal Nat��ure (Pat��z, 2005) concluded hhumman-induced warmmingg world is now expperiencingg is already causingg 150,000 death��hs and 5 mmillion incident��s of disease eachh year fromm addit��ional mmalaria and diarrhhea, mmost��ly in ppoorest�� nat��ions. Death��h and disease incident��s are likely soar as warmmingg increases. Irresppect��ively of pprecise nummbers of suchh hharmmful event��s, it�� hhas becomme clear climmat��e chhangge is already compmprommisingg rightgh��s life, libert��y and ppersonal securit��y. HHence, eth��hical analysis of climmat��e chhangge mmust�� exammine ppolicies hhave an impmpact�� on th��hese basic rightgh��s. Thhe rightgh��s life, libert��y, and securit��y are basic rightgh��s are foundat��ion for derivingg oth��her widely recoggnized rightgh��s found in int��ernat��ional law and ppract��ice. Thhese rightgh��s, for exampmple, been basis for suchh ppract��ical rules as “no hharmm pprincipple” and “pprecaut��ionary pprincipple.” Thhese rightgh��s are recoggnized in a nummber of int��ernat��ional t��reat��ies and decisions in int��ernat��ional t��ribunals, and widely recoggnized as foundat��ional by mmany of world’s religgions. Thhese rightgh��s are also exppressly set�� out�� in Art��icle Thhree of Universal Declarat��ion of HHumman Rightgh��s3 exppressly pprovides th��hat��: Everyone a rightgh�� life, libert��y, and securit��y.3 Universal Declarat��ion of Rightgh��s was adoptp��ed by Unit��ed Nat��ions General Assemmbly (A/RES/217, Decemmber 10, 1948 at�� Palais de Chhaillot��, Paris). It�� cont��ains a list�� of rightgh��s UN hholds shhould be gguarant��eed all ppeopple. It�� was conceived as object��ives be followed by ggovernmment��s; hhowever it�� does not�� formm ppart�� of int��ernat��ional law, th��houghgh it�� is cust��ommary for abide by it��. In 1968 Unit��ed Nat��ions Int��ernat��ional Conference on Rightgh��s declared it�� const��it��ut��ed an obliggat��ion for all mmemmbers of int��ernat��ional commmmunit��y follow it��. It�� also served as basis for t��wo leggally-bindingg UN rightgh��s Covenant��s, Int��ernat��ional Covenant�� on Civil and Polit��ical Rightgh��s, and Int��ernat��ional Covenant�� on Econommic, Social, and Cult��ural Rightgh��s.Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change 10 HHummans hhave rightgh��s t��o life, libert��y, and ppersonal securit��y th��hat�� creat��e dut��ies in oth��hers refrain fromm int��erference with��h th��hese basic rightgh��s. In th��his ppapper we seek hhelpp clarify our dut��ies pprevent�� th��he negglect�� or violat��ion of th��hose rightgh��s. OOf course, climmat��e chhangge ppolicy mmakingg raises addit��ional eth��hical issues includingg quest��ions about�� dut��ies pprot��ect�� fut��ure ggenerat��ions of hhummans, pplant��s, animmals, and ecosyst��emms. Alth��houghgh issues are considered in sect��ions of ppapper, deepper analyses of eth��hical quest��ions will be focus of fut��ure work of Proggramm. We not��e at�� early st��agge of our analysis, climmat��e chhangge raises a nummber of ppart��icularly chhallenggingg eth��hical issues about�� hhow fairly shhare benefit��s and burdens of climmat��e chhangge optp��ions. Alth��houghgh issues will be dealt�� with��h in lat��er sect��ions of and pproggramm, we not��e th��hemm hhere flagg th��heir impmport��ance and invit��e sppecial reflect��ion on mmatt����ers. We also not��e because mmany of t��ools oft��en empmployed solve environmment��al pproblemms suchh as cost��-benefit�� analysis usually do not�� adequat��ely deal with��h issues because th��hey oft��en iggnore quest��ions of just�� dist��ribut��ion. Thhese chhallengges of dist��ribut��ional fairness arise out�� of cert��ain fact��s about�� climmat��e chhangge includingg: a. Many of whho will be mmost�� hharmmed by climmat��e chhangge cont��ribut��ed litt����le causingg pproblemm;b. Many of whho emmit�� GHHGs are least�� th��hreat��ened by adverse climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s;c. Thhose are vulnerable climmat��e chhangge hharmms are oft��en least�� able ppay for adaptp��at��ion mmeasures needed fromm climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s; d. Because th��here is a need set�� an aggreed uppon gglobal atm��mosphpheric t��argget��, climmat��e chhangge mmakers will need face quest��ion of whho shhould bear burdens of reducingg emmissions so an atm��mosphpheric GHHG t��argget�� can be achhieved th��hroughgh nat��ional emmissions limmit��at��ions; e. In allocat��ingg nat��ional emmissions reduct��ions t��argget��s, will need t��ake a pposit��ion on whho hhas a rightgh�� use biosphphere as a carbon sink and in whhat�� ammount��s; f. Emmissions levels fromm hhumman act��ivit��y vary ggreat��ly around world and th��herefore hhugge emmissions reduct��ions will be needed danggerous climmat��e chhangge will fall disppropport��ionably on somme if equit��y is not�� t��aken seriously;gg. In resppondingg th��hreat�� of climmat��e chhangge, current�� will affect�� int��erest��s of fut��ure ggenerat��ions.II. Ethical Issue One: Responsibility for Damages—Who is ethically responsible for the consequences of climate change, that is, who is liable for the burdens of: a. preparing for and then responding to climate change (i.e. adaptation) orb. paying for unavoided damages?A. Factual Context a. Relevant Climate Change Science1. Climmat��e chhangge been seriously discussed as a hhealth��h and environmment�� for several decades with��h scient��ific int��erest�� ggrowingg rappidly since lat��e 1970s whhen mmeasuremment��s of atm��mosphpheric GHHG levels were det��ermmined be risingg in ppropport��ion use of fossil fuel around world. 11 2. H Humman-induced climmat��e chhangge is now discernable and is already adversely affect��ingg somme hhummans, pplant��s, animmals, and ecosyst��emms around th��he world. HHowever, as somme ppart��s of world are warmmingg fast��er th��han oth��hers, somme of climmat��e chhangge dammagges are mmore discernable in somme of world (IPCC, 2001).3. It�� is believed th��hat�� hhumman act��ivit��ies are respponsible for warmmingg in ammount�� slightgh��ly less 1°C alth��houghgh somme of world hhave expperienced ggreat��er warmmingg th��his gglobal averagge. Thhis warmmingg is att����ribut��able t��o atm��mosphpheric GHHG levels in concent��rat��ions occurred nat��urally before begginningg of indust��rial revolut��ion. HHumman act��ivit��ies respponsible for elevat��ed warmmingg include mmost��ly GHHG emmissions and land use chhangges (IPCC, 2001).4. Thhe ammount�� of dammagges caused hhummans and ecologgical syst��emms by hhumman-induced climmat��e chhangge deppends on mmaggnit��ude of t��empmperat��ure chhangge. Thhe ammount�� of increase will be expperienced is deppendent�� on GHHG atm��mosphpheric levels. Thhe concent��rat��ion of GHHGs in atm��mosphphere deppends on collect��ive act��ion of GHHG emmitt����ers around world as well as chhangges beingg mmade nat��ural syst��emms an affect�� on carbon st��oragge. 5. About�� hhalf of GHHGs emmitt����ed remmain in atm��mosphphere whhile oth��her are beingg st��ored in carbon sinks, pprimmarily in t��errest��rial ecosyst��emms and oceans (IPCC, 2001).6. Harmms already beingg expperienced by somme ppeopple are of mmany t��yppes includingg, but�� are not�� limmit��ed t��o, death��h, disease, ecologgical hharmm, floods and droughtgh��s, risingg seas, int��ense st��ormms, and increased hheat�� waves. HHarmms due induced climmat��e chhangge will ggrow in years ahhead even if it�� is ppossible for int��ernat��ional commmmunit��y st��abilize atm��mosphpheric GHHG concent��rat��ions near current�� levels. Increased warmmingg will cont��inue even if atm��mosphpheric GHHG levels are hheld const��ant�� because of th��hermmal laggs in climmat��e syst��emm includingg laggs in oceans (IPCC, 2001).7. It�� is very unlikely atm��mosphpheric levels of COO2 equivalent�� can be st��abilized mmuchh below 450 ppmppm duringg cent��ury. (St��evens, 1997). Thhis virt��ually gguarant��ees siggnificant�� addit��ional warmmingg and associat��ed hharmms somme and pplaces around world. (Baer and Ath��hansiou, 2004). 8. Given ppoint�� 6 and 7, even if we adoptp�� mmost�� robust�� adaptp��at��ion st��rat��eggies ppossible, somme current�� and fut��ure ecosyst��emms are unavoidable. OthO��her dammagges could be mminimmized or avoided if adaptp��at��ion st��epps are t��aken. 9. Thhere remmains somme scient��ific uncert��aint��y about�� t��immingg and of fut��ure climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s; hhowever, uncert��aint��y hhas been described as a rangge of pplausible impmpact��s will be caused by different�� levels of atm��mosphpheric concent��rat��ions of atm��mosphpheric GHHGs by Int��erggovernmment��al Panel on Climmat��e Chhangge (IPCC, 2001).4 b. Distribution of Harms and Benefits10. Thhe developped nat��ions are respponsible for build upp of GHHGs in atm��mosphphere ppresent�� levels alth��houghgh t��ot��al emmissions and pper cappit��a emmissions levels vary ggreat��ly ammongg nat��ions (Arggawal and Nairin 1991; Est��rada-OOyeala, 1992; Müller, 2001; Munasinghghe, 2002; Muylaert��, 2002; Paavola, 2004; Pingguelli-Rosa and Munasinghghe, 2002).4 Thhe IPCC was creat��ed in 1988 by World Met��rologgical Associat��ion and Unit��ed Nat��ions Environmment�� Proggramm advise nat��ions about�� science of climmat��e chhangge. IPCC repport��s ggrowingg levels of confidence about�� climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s alth��houghgh uncert��aint��ies remmain.Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change 1 2 11. Thhose whho are hharmmed by hhumman-induced climmat��e chhangge are locat��ed in both��h developpingg and developped nat��ions and th��hose whho benefit�� fromm GHHG emmissions are locat��ed in both��h developpingg and developped nat��ions (Arggawal and Nairin 1991; Est��rada-OOyeala, 1992; Müller, 2001; Munasinghghe, 2002; Muylaert��, 2002; Paavola, 2004; Pingguelli-Rosa and Munasinghghe, 2002).12. Thhe developped count��ries are mmost�� respponsible for t��empmperat��ure increases th��hat�� th��he Earth��h hhas expperienced recent��ly, hhavingg cont��ribut��ed ggreat��est�� ppercent��agge t��o hhist��orical increases in GHHG emmissions. (Migguez, 2002).13. H However, vulnerable climmat��e chhangge dammagges are oft��en least�� respponsible for GHHG emmissions. (IPCC, 2001; Est��rada-1992) 14. Thhose whho could benefit�� fromm adaptp��at��ion mmeasures are also oft��en least�� respponsible for GHHG emmissions. Thhis is t��rue both��h at�� nat��ional level and at�� individual level. 15. Thhose vulnerable climmat��e chhangge are oft��en least�� able afford adaptp��at��ion suchh as dikes, irriggat��ion compmpensat��e for droughtgh��s, mmovingg away fromm flood or st��ormm pprone areas, inst��allingg HHVAC syst��emms and impmplemment��ingg impmproved ppublic hhealth��h syst��emms. In addit��ion, ppoor ppeopple can’t�� afford insurance aggainst�� climmat��e-relat��ed dammagge.16. Thhere is somme uncert��aint��y reggardingg econommic impmpact��s of undert��akingg reduce GHHG emmissions. Models shhow a rangge of ppossible cost��s, with��h somme reduct��ions beingg achhievable at�� no cost�� or cost�� savinggs and oth��hers at�� considerable cost��s. Econommic est��immat��es hhave not�� usually incorpporat��ed benefit��s be achhieved fromm innovat��ion. Many largge corpporat��ions achhieved considerable reduct��ions in GHHG emmissions whhile realizingg cost�� savinggs. With��h longger lead t��immes, cost��s can be reduced. Cost�� est��immat��es in econommic mmodels rely deepply on cont��est��ed assumptmp��ions about�� dammagge-funct��ion, rat��e of discount��, t��echhnologgical pproggress, and values of a st��at��ist��ical hhumman life.c. International Negotiations and Agreements17. Int��ernat��ional neggot��iat��ions set�� t��argget��s and t��immet��ables were called for by mmany scient��ist��s in 1980s. Duringg th��his t��imme, somme ggovernmment��s, orgganizat��ions, and individuals resist��ed ppleas fromm ppot��ent��ial vict��imms of climmat��e chhangge t��ake pprecaut��ionary act��ion reduce GHHG emmissions and th��hereby mmit��iggat��e climmat��e chhangge dammagges. Thhe arggumment��s for resist��ance were oft��en based on cont��ent��ions th��here was scient��ific uncert��aint��y concerningg climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s and impmplemment��at��ion of limmit�� GHHG emmissions would ent��ail siggnificant�� cost��s nat��ional econommies (Brown, 2002).18. Int��ernat��ional climmat��e chhangge neggot��iat��ions beggan in lat��e 1980s, with��h somme nat��ions and orgganizat��ions callingg for enforceable emmissions whhile oth��hers resist��ed mmakingg commmmitm��ment��s oft��en on basis of scient��ific uncert��aint��y and cost�� nat��ional econommies (Brown 2002).19. Somme normms about�� respponsibilit��y for dammagges fromm induced climmat��e chhangge are well est��ablishhed in a variet��y of int��ernat��ional aggreemment��s includingg Rio Declarat��ion on Environmment�� and Developmpment��, Unit��ed Nat��ions FFrammework Convent��ion on Climmat��e Chhangge (UNFFCCC), Kyot��o Prot��ocol UNFFCCC, and Law of Sea.20. Thhe Rio Declarat��ion on Environmment�� and Developmpment�� whhichh st��at��es in relevant�� ppart��: i. St��at��es hhave, in accordance with��h Chhart��er of Unit��ed Nat��ions and pprincipples of int��ernat��ional law, sovereiggn rightgh�� expploit�� th��heir own resources ppursuant�� own 1 3 environmment��al and developmpment��al ppolicies, and the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction (UN, 1992b, Principple 2).ii. Nat��ional auth��horit��ies shhould endeavor t��o pprommot��e th��he int��ernalizat��ion of environmment��al cost��s and use of econommic inst��rumment��s, taking into account the approach that the polluter should, in principle, bear the cost of pollution, with��h due reggard ppublic int��erest�� and with��hout�� dist��ort��ingg int��ernat��ional t��rade and investm��ment�� (UN, 1992b, Principple 16).iii. St��at��es shhall developp nat��ional law reggardingg liabilit��y and compmpensat��ion for vict��imms of ppollut��ion and oth��her environmment��al dammagge. St��at��es shhall also coopperat��e in an exppedit��ious and mmore det��ermmined mmanner developp furth��her int��ernat��ional law reggardingg liabilit��y and compmpensat��ion for adverse effect��s of environmment��al dammagge caused by act��ivit��ies with��hin th��heir jurisdict��ion or cont��rol areas beyond jurisdict��ion (UN, 1992b, Principple 13).2. Addit��ional normms relevant�� respponsibilit��y for dammagges caused by one nat��ion anoth��her are cont��ained in Unit��ed Nat��ions FFrammework Convent��ion on Climmat��e Chhangge (UNFFCCC) includingg:i. Recalling also th��hat�� St��at��es hhave, in accordance with��h Chhart��er of Unit��ed Nat��ions and pprincipples of int��ernat��ional law, sovereiggn rightgh�� expploit�� own resources ppursuant�� own environmment��al and developmpment��al and the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction (UN, 1992a, Preface).ii. Thhe Part��ies shhould pprot��ect�� climmat��e syst��emm for benefit�� of ppresent�� and fut��ure ggenerat��ions of hhummankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. Accordingly, the developed country Parties should take the lead in combating climate change and the adverse effects thereof. (UN, 1992a, Art��. 3).iii. Thhe Part��ies shhould take precautionary measures to anticipate, prevent or minimize the causes of climate change and mitigate its adverse effects. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing such measures, t��akingg int��o account�� ppolicies and mmeasures deal with��h climmat��e chhangge shhould be cost��-effect��ive so as ensure gglobal benefit��s at�� lowest�� ppossible cost�� (UN, 1992a, Art��. 3). 22. Thhere are also normms creat��ed by oth��her int��ernat��ional accords were not�� int��ended address issue of climmat��e chhangge direct��ly, but�� include issues will be affect��ed by climmat��e chhangge could be relevant�� respponsibilit��y dammagges. Thhese aggreemment��s, for inst��ance, include Int��ernat��ional Law of Sea, Convent��ion on Biologgical Diversit��y, and Convent��ion on Int��ernat��ional Trade on Endanggered Sppecies of FFlora and FFauna.B. Ethical Analysis of Issue One1. Since ppeopple around world hhave basic rightgh��s be pprot��ect��ed fromm act��ions of oth��hers th��hreat��en life, hhealth��h, and securit��y, and ggiven effect��s of climmat��e chhangge will violat��e th��hese Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change 1 4 rightgh��s, normms mmust�� be aggreed uppon by th��he int��ernat��ional commmmunit��y t��o est��ablishh respponsibilit��y for climmat��e chhangge mmit��iggat��ion, adaptp��at��ion, and for repparat��ion of dammagges due climmat��e chhangge. 2. Thhe Rio Declarat��ion and Unit��ed Nat��ions FFrammework Convent��ion on Climmat��e Chhangge est��ablishhed followingg normms about�� respponsibilit��y for climmat��e chhangge:a. Nat��ions hhave respponsibilit��y reduce GHHG emmissions of act��ivit��ies with��hin th��heir jurisdict��ion;b. Pollut��ers respponsibilit��y bear cost��s of ppollut��ion; c. Nat��ions respponsibilit��y reduce emmissions based uppon equit��y pprevent�� danggerous anth��hroppoggenic int��erference with��h climmat��e syst��emm; d. Thhe developped nat��ions respponsibilit��y t��ake lead in reducingg th��hreat�� of climmat��e chhangge;e. Nat��ions mmay not�� use scient��ific uncert��aint��y as an excuse for t��akingg cost��-effect��ive act��ion reduce of climmat��e chhangge (UN, 1992a; UN, 1992b).3. Whhile normms est��ablishhed by various int��ernat��ional law documment��s are impmport��ant�� and relevant��, th��hey are not�� sufficient�� in th��hat�� pprincipples of ret��ribut��ive and dist��ribut��ive just��ice are relevant�� det��ermminingg respponsibilit��y for hharmm fromm hhumman-induced climmat��e chhangge. Thhese mmake th��hose respponsible for in ppropport��ion cont��ribut��ion in absence of mmorally relevant�� would allow for oth��her assiggnmment��s of respponsibilit��y.4. Because hharmms fromm climmat��e chhangge are relat��ed ppast�� and current�� emmissions levels, followingg fact��s, ammongg oth��hers, are relevant�� any nat��ion’s respponsibilit��y for dammagges oth��hers:a. Maggnit��ude of t��ot��al nat��ional and pper cappit��a emmissions duringg pperiod of concern.b. Thhe nat��ion’s ppropport��ional shhare of gglobal emmissions led climmat��e chhangge hhas or will cause hharmm. c. H Hist��orical cont��ribut��ions of GHHG emmissions.5. Accordingg relevant�� of just��ice, whho claimm ent��it��lemment�� use atm��mosphphere or oth��her nat��ural syst��emms as a sink for GHHG emmissions at�� levels ppropport��ionat��ely ggreat��er th��han oth��hers burden of demmonst��rat��ingg claimm for ent��it��lemment�� unequal levels of emmissions is based uppon relevant�� crit��eria. 6. Somme nat��ions used cost�� econommy as an excuse for unwillinggness act��ion reduce emmissions; hhowever, cost�� is not�� an eth��hically acceptp��able excuse for failingg act��ions reduce hharmmful levels of ppollut��ion below emmitt����ingg ppart��y’s fair shhare of emmissions, ppart��icularly whhen th��hreat��ens basic hhumman rightgh��s life, hhealth��h, and securit��y. (See discussion on cost�� below, Issue FFive). Cost�� considerat��ions are apppproppriat��e in effort��s find cost��-effect��ive st��rat��eggies reduce levels of emmissions 7. Thhose enggagged in inequit��able and danggerous behhavior concerningg GHHG emmissions cannot�� use excuse of lack of cert��aint��y about�� just��ify risky behhavior. (See discussion on uncert��aint��y below, Issue FFour.) 8. Accordingg relevant�� of just��ice, whhen mmult��ipple ppart��ies cont��ribut��ed cause oth��hers, hharmmingg oth��hers will be respponsible in of inflict��ed whhen it�� is ppossible det��ermmine relat��ive cont��ribut��ion of ppart��ies. To det��ermmine respponsibilit��y of nat��ions for climmat��e chhangge th��here are t��wo quest��ions need be answered. 15 a. Thhe first�� is relat��ively easy t��o ascert��ain. Thhat�� is, hhow mmuchh did th��hat�� nat��ion cont��ribut��e th��hroughgh it��s emmissions or land use chhangges th��he build upp of GHHG in atm��mosphphere beyond whhat�� would hhave occurred nat��urally. b. Thhe second quest��ion will be mmore difficult�� answer in somme cases because dammagges fromm climmat��e are sommet��immes caused by event��s mmay occurred nat��urally in ppart��, suchh as st��ormm dammagges. Thhat�� is, for inst��ance, with��h or with��hout�� hhumman-induced climmat��e chhangge, floods would occur nat��urally. Yet�� as induced warmmingg increases, floodingg int��ensit��y and frequency are likely increase. FFor th��his reason, it�� will be necessary det��ermmine cont��ribut��ion fromm act��ivit��ies climmat��e event��s suchh as floods cause dammagges in order assess respponsibilit��y for induced dammagges. Issues to be Developed1. In addit��ion pprovisions of UNFFCCC, whhat�� normms exist�� in hhard and soft�� int��ernat��ional law suchh as Law of Sea, Convent��ion on biologgical Diversit��y, Convent��ion on Int��ernat��ional Trade of Endanggered Sppecies, Trail Smmelt��er Case, et��c., mmightgh�� be relevant�� respponsibilit��y for climmat��e chhangge dammagges. 2. If nat��ion st��at��es respponsibilit��y reduce GHHG emmissions, whhat�� can be said about�� eth��hical respponsibilit��y of oth��her unit��s of ggovernmment��, orgganizat��ions, and individuals or oth��her non-st��at��e st��at��e act��ors with��hin th��hose st��at��es?3. H How do t��ort�� rules informm int��ernat��ional respponsibilit��y of nat��ions? 4. Whhat�� eth��hical pprincipples shhould be followed in det��ermminingg liabilit��y for climmat��e chhangge dammagges? inst��ance, in det��ermminingg liabilit��y shhould considerat��ions of ut��ilit��y be t��aken int��o account�� in relat��ion rightgh��s? Shhould liabilit��y rules consider suchh mmatt����ers as sppreadingg cost��s ammongg ppart��ies? Whhat�� oth��her ppublic ppolicy concerns shhould informm creat��ion of liabilit��y rules for climmat��e chhangge?5. Whhat�� eth��hical shhould be followed for det��ermminingg liabilit��y with��hin nat��ions ggiven dispparit��ies ammongg whho benefit��ed fromm ppast�� GHHG emmissions and differences in hhist��orical emmissions levels ammongg ggovernmment�� subdivisions, orgganizat��ions, and individuals?III. Ethical Issue Two: Atmospheric Targets — What ethical principles should guide the choice of specific climate change policy objectives, including but not limited to, maximum human-induced warming and atmospheric greenhouse gas targets?A. Factual ContextSee fact��ual pparaggraphphs above:1. In 1992, under Unit��ed Nat��ions FFrammework Convent��ion on Climmat��e Chhangge (UN 1992a, Art�� 2), ggovernmment��s aggreed “st��abilize GHHG concent��rat��ions in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Suchh a level shhould be achhieved with��hin a t��imme-framme sufficient�� allow ecosyst��emms adaptp�� nat��urally Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change 16 t��o climmat��e chhangge, t��o ensure th��hat�� food pproduct��ion is not�� th��hreat��ened and enable econommic developmpment�� pproceed in a sust��ainable mmanner.” HHowever, no atm��mosphpheric GHHG t��argget�� hhas been aggreed ggives scient��ific pprecision th��his commmmitm��ment��.2. Different�� levels of atm��mosphpheric GHHG concent��rat��ions will ggenerat��e different�� levels and kinds of dammagges hhumman hhealth��h and th��he environmment�� with��h somme of ppoorest�� ppeopple around world sufferingg ggreat��est�� hharmm (Arggawal, and Nairin 1991; Est��rada-OOyeala, 1992; Müller, 2001; Munasinghghe, 2002; Muylaert��, 2002; Paavola, 2004; Pingguelli-Rosa and Munasinghghe, 2002).3. Any increases in atm��mosphpheric concent��rat��ions of GHHGs will result�� in addit��ional warmmingg and consequent�� somme ppeopple, pplant��s, animmals, and ecosyst��emms. Thhe ggreat��er atm��mosphpheric level of GHHGs, pprobabilit��y climmat��e chhangge will cause serious and cat��ast��rophphic climmat��e chhangge dammagges hhummans and environmment��. It�� is believed by mmany scient��ist��s addit��ional warmmingg fromm hhumman-induced climmat��e chhangge shhould be keptp�� below 2°C avoid rappid non-linear impmpact��s fromm climmat��e chhangge; hhowever, cat��ast��rophphic could be t��riggggered by addit��ional warmmingg of less or mmore th��han 2°C because level is uncert��ain (Ath��hanasiou and Baer, 2002).4. Given current�� world demmand for fossil fuels, size of gglobal aut��ommobile and t��ranspport��at��ion fleet��s, and unavailabilit��y of affordable non-ppollut��ingg t��echhnologgies, mmonies already invest��ed in exist��ingg and lead t��imme necessary repplace exist��ingg it�� is likely be ppract��ically impmpossible st��abilize atm��mosphpheric GHHG levels below 450 ppmppm of COO2 equivalent�� (St��evens, 1997).5. In sett����ingg a st��abilizat��ion for GHHG concent��rat��ions, mmajor scient��ific uncert��aint��ies need be faced includingg, but�� not�� limmit��ed t��o, uncert��aint��ies about��: a. th ��he ammount�� of warmmingg caused by different�� levels of GHHGs in atm��mosphphere or “climmat��e sensit��ivit��y;” b. ��he act��ual ammount�� of GHHGs will be emmitt����ed ggiven unknowns about�� fut��ure t��echhnologgy, ppoppulat��ion, and econommic act��ivit��y;c. ��he mmaggnit��ude, t��yppe, and ggeoggraphphic sppread of adverse impmpact��s will be ggenerat��ed by different�� levels of warmmingg; d. ��he t��immingg of t��empmperat��ure chhangge and oth��her climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s, includingg ppossibilit��y of rappid non-linear chhangges; e. ��hreshhold levels will cause climmat��e surpprises and irreversible and ppot��ent��ially cat��ast��rophphic impmpact��s if exceeded;f. ��he abilit��y of t��ake ant��icippat��ory pprot��ect��ive act��ion, gg. ��he resiliency of ecosyst��emms, and;hh. ��he vulnerabilit��y of cert��ain climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s (IPCC, 2001).6. To deal with��h scient��ific uncert��aint��y about�� warmmingg and it��s impmpact��s, IPCC ident��ified a rangge of ppossible atm��mosphpheric GHHG concent��rat��ions and associat��ed increases. ident��ificat��ion of rangge does not�� ppreclude of rappid non-linear chhangges in climmat��e syst��emm at�� t��empmperat��ures in lower end of rangge (IPCC, 2001).7. Thhose whho will be affect��ed by climmat��e chhangge include not�� only current��ly livingg but�� fut��ure ggenerat��ions and non-hhummans. Thheir int��erest��s are ppart��icularly at�� risk fromm unchhecked climmat��e chhangge’s likely dest��ruct��ion of pplant��s and animmals, and increases in sea levels, floods, droughtgh��s, disease, and int��ensit��y of st��ormms. 17 8. St��abilizat��ion of GHHGs in th��he atm��mosphphere t��o a safe level will require reduct��ion of gglobal emmissions by 60 80 ppercent�� fromm current�� levels and by mmuchh largger ammount��s fromm business-as-usual pproject��ions of emmissions (IPCC, 2001). To mmake necessary reduct��ions, decisions mmust�� be mmade about�� hhow eachh nat��ion will be respponsible for achhievingg th��hese reduct��ions. (See discussion below on fair allocat��ions, Issue Thhree.) 9. Chhanggingg anoth��her nat��ion’s climmat��e can seriously affect�� it��s int��erest��s because qualit��y of any nat��ion’s climmat��e det��ermmines, ammongg oth��her th��hinggs, (1) it��s ppot��ent��ial for ggrowingg food, (2) t��yppe of indiggenous pplant��s and animmals, (3) need use energgy pprot��ect�� fromm ext��remmes of hheat�� and cold, (4) hhumman hhealth��h th��hreat��s fromm nat��ural ppath��hoggens, (5) cit��izen vulnerabilit��y dammagge fromm ext��remme weath��her event��s, (6) nummber of hhours th��hat�� cit��izens can work or recreat��e in out��doors in commfort��, (7) ammount�� of freshh wat��er available for uses, (8) rat��e of flow in rivers and st��reamms, (9) weath��her limmit��at��ions on t��ravel, (10) dammagge caused by floods, and (11) abilit��y att����ract�� t��ourist��s (Landes, 1998).10. H Humman-induced climmat��e chhangge hhas already caused dammagges. Moreover, any addit��ional warmmingg above ppresent�� levels will cause dammagges somme ppeopple and somme pplaces whhichh could be cat��ast��rophphic th��hemm. (See discussion on respponsibilit��y above, Issue OOne.)11. Many of ppoorest�� are hhighghly vulnerable climmat��e chhangge because: (1) ecologgical syst��emms of mmany of nat��ions are mmost�� at�� risk fromm climmat��e chhangge, (2) of world’s are vulnerable st��ormms, floodingg, and sea level rise, (3) of is at�� ggreat��est�� risk fromm warmmingg, ppart��icularly fromm vect��or borne disease; (4) food supppplies of are oft��en at�� ggreat�� risk fromm increases in droughtgh��s and hheat��; and (5) nat��ions and hhave weakest�� cappacit��y adaptp�� climmat��e chhangge (IPCC, 2001).12. Most�� nat��ions whho developped nat��ional climmat��e chhangge st��rat��eggies not�� consult��ed oth��her nat��ions or th��heir cit��izens whho will be hharmmed by climmat��e chhangge.13. Ecosyst��emms around world are at�� risk fromm climmat��e chhangge includingg ecosyst��emms pprovide life supppport�� services hhummans, pplant��s, and animmals. Ammongg ecosyst��emms are vulnerable climmat��e chhangge are mmarine ecosyst��emms includingg coral reefs, and t��errest��rial ecosyst��emms suchh as forest��s and ggrasslands. Since climmat��e chhangge could cause rappid chhangges in ecosyst��emms, climmat��e chhangge furth��her th��hreat��ens and animmals by causingg mmassive chhangges in ecosyst��emms on whhichh life deppends. Moreover, somme ecosyst��emms are already st��ressed by oth��her act��ivit��ies could be pput�� at�� even ggreat��er risk by climmat��e chhangge. FFor inst��ance, fishheries around world are already vulnerable overexpploit��at��ion of fishheries, somme t��roppical forest��s are in rappid decline fromm overexpploit��at��ion, and ecosyst��emms around world are vulnerable increases in nit��roggen fromm act��ivit��ies. th��his reason, climmat��e chhangge ecosyst��emms around world already under st��ress. B. Ethical Analysis of Issue Two1. Thhe issue of a GHHG atm��mosphpheric st��abilizat��ion t��argget�� raises pprofound eth��hical quest��ions because levels of GHHGs in atm��mosphphere will det��ermmine whhat�� animmals, and survive and whhat�� dammagges will be caused hhummans and environmment��. 2. Thhe rightgh��s be pprot��ect��ed aggainst�� fromm oth��hers life, hhealth��h, and securit��y, as well as UNFFCCC commmmitm��ment�� by nat��ions reduce emmissions levels Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change 1 8 th��hat�� would “pprevent�� danggerous anth��hroppocent��ric int��erference with��h th��he climmat��e syst��emm,” are basic eth��hical pprincipples th��hat�� mmust�� be considered in sett����ingg atm��mosphpheric GHHG t��argget��s. 3. Thhe GHHG atm��mosphpheric t��argget�� raises pprofound quest��ions of dist��ribut��ive just��ice because climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s will not�� be dist��ribut��ed equally, because nat��ions and ppeopples hhave different�� respponsibilit��ies for current�� levels of GHHGs in atm��mosphphere, and because nat��ions and are different��ially vulnerable t��o climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s. FFor th��his reason, nat��ions whho are willingg t��olerat��e somme climmat��e chhangge dammagges th��heir nat��ion cannot�� iggnore dammagges will be impmposed uppon oth��hers with��hout�� consent��.4. Thhe GHHG atm��mosphpheric raises impmport��ant�� quest��ions of pprocedural just��ice because no count��ry or pperson hhas rightgh�� pput�� oth��her nat��ions or ppersons at�� ggrave risk with��hout�� consent��. Procedural just��ice demmands ppart��icippat��ion of vict��imms in decision mmakingg about�� whhat�� risks cannot�� be acceptp��ed, whhat�� risks are acceptp��able, and under whhat�� condit��ions risks will be acceptp��ed. (See discussion below on fair ppart��icippat��ion, Issue Eightgh��.)5. Thhose whho are mmost�� vulnerable climmat��e chhangge cont��ribut��ed litt����le elevat��ed levels of GHHGs in atm��mosphphere. Thherefore, th��hose vulnerable ppeopple whho will be hharmmed by climmat��e chhangge ppolicies or by absence rightgh��s ppart��icippat��e in developmpment�� of est��ablishh atm��mosphpheric t��argget��s for GHHGs.6. Given all a rightgh�� be pprot��ect��ed fromm th��hreat��s life, safet��y, and securit��y caused by oth��hers, and exist��ingg levels of GHHG emmissions th��hreat��en th��hese rightgh��s, UNFFCCC commmmitm��ment�� reduce GHHG emmissions levels will avoid danggerous anth��hroppocent��ric int��erference with��h climmat��e syst��emm shhould be int��erppret��ed require st��abilizat��ion levels at�� lowest�� ppossible levels.7. So longg as atm��mosphpheric GHHG levels basic hhumman rightgh��s, Collaborat��ive Proggramm on Eth��hical Dimmensions of Climmat��e Chhangge cannot�� find any resppect��ed eth��hical syst��emm would just��ify allowingg atm��mosphpheric levels of GHHGs rise th��hereby addit��ionally jeoppardizingg rightgh��s. In oth��her words, various eth��hical syst��emms convergge in conclusion atm��mosphpheric levels of GHHGs shhould be st��abilized at�� lowest�� levels above exist��ingg atm��mosphpheric GHHG concent��rat��ions (OttO���� et��. al. 2004).8. Nat��ions impmplemment��ingg atm��mosphpheric for GHHGs are eth��hically obliggat��ed consider int��erest��s of non-reppresent��ed fut��ure ggenerat��ions and non-hhummans. 9. Thhe issues of scient��ific uncert��aint��y in sett����ingg a GHHG atm��mosphpheric raise impmport��ant�� eth��hical issues include both��h subst��ant��ive quest��ions about�� whho shhould bear burden of pproof with��h reggard uncert��aint��ies and whhat�� levels of risk are acceptp��able, as well as quest��ions of just��ice suchh as whheth��her vict��imms mmay be at�� risk exercised free informmed consent�� in decisions will impmpose risk on th��hemm, or whheth��her even suchh consent�� would leggit��immize act��ions by oth��hers life, hhealth��h, and securit��y. (See discussion below on scient��ific uncert��aint��y, Issue FFour.) Issues to be Developed1. Thhe chhoice of lower or hhighgher GHHG atm��mosphpheric ggreat�� eth��hical siggnificance ppart��icularly in lightgh�� of different��ial impmpact��s on vulnerable ppeopple. As alt��ernat��ive GHHG atm��mosphpheric are ppropposed, eth��hicist��s need ident��ify eth��hical siggnificance of eachh alt��ernat��ive.19 IV. Ethical Issue Three: Allocating Global Emissions among Nations — What ethical principles should govern the allocation of responsibility among people, organizations, and governments at all levels to prevent ethically intolerable impacts from climate change?A. Factual Context See fact��ual pparaggraphphs above.1. To reduce eth��hically int��olerable impmpact��s fromm climmat��e chhangge it�� will be necessary t��o limmit�� t��ot��al gglobal GHHG emmissions. (See Issue Two.) 2. To st��abilize atm��mosphpheric GHHGs at�� acceptp��able levels, th��he world needs reduce exist��ingg emmissions siggnificant��ly. To achhieve an atm��mosphpheric t��argget��, nat��ions will need reduce th��heir GHHG emmissions in suchh a way th��hat�� emmissions fromm all nat��ions do not�� cause atm��mosphpheric emmissions exceed acceptp��able levels. 3. Thhe lat��er int��ernat��ional commmmunit��y aggrees on acceptp��able GHHGs atm��mosphpheric t��argget��s, mmore difficult�� it�� will be achhieve lower atm��mosphpheric GHHG concent��rat��ions.4. Nat��ions hhave mmade widely different�� cont��ribut��ions GHHG atm��mosphpheric concent��rat��ions in t��ermms of t��ons of emmissions, pper cappit��a emmissions levels, and whhen GHHG were emmitt����ed (Arggawal and Nairin 1991; Est��rada-OOyeala, 1992; Müller, 2001; Munasinghghe, 2002; Muylaert��, 2002; Paavola, 2004; Pingguelli-Rosa and Munasinghghe, 2002; Müller 2002).5. Because GHHGs in atm��mosphphere are well mmixed fromm all sources, it�� mmakes litt����le difference atm��mosphpheric GHHG concent��rat��ions whhere emmissions are released.6. Somme GHHGs emmitt����ed int��o atm��mosphphere are st��ored in oceans, forest��s, soils, and pplant��s. OOft��en th��hese carbon sinks are not�� in jurisdict��ion of nat��ions whho are respponsible for GHHG emmissions, nor nat��ions in whhichh suchh sinks are locat��ed ggiven ppermmission emmitt����ingg nat��ions use nat��ural resources as carbon sinks. 7. In absence of fundingg for new t��echhnologgies, mmany ppoorer nat��ions will need emmit�� GHHGs th��han current�� level in order mmeet�� basic hhumman needs for food, shhelt��er, and securit��y (Shhue, 1994, 1999). OthO��her nat��ions’ current�� level of emmissions far exceeds th��hose needed basic needs. 8. Thhe UNFFCCC cont��ains somme normmat��ive gguidance on hhow emmissions’ allocat��ions shhould be ammongg nat��ions. Thhe UNFFCCC pprovides th��hat��: “Thhe Part��ies shhould pprot��ect�� climmat��e syst��emm for benefit�� of ppresent�� and fut��ure ggenerat��ions of hhummankind, on basis of equit��y and in accordance with��h commmmon but�� different��iat��ed respponsibilit��ies and resppect��ive cappabilit��ies. Accordinggly, developped count��ry Part��ies shhould t��ake lead in commbat��ingg climmat��e chhangge and adverse effect��s th��hereof” (UN 1992a, Art��. 3). 9. Thhere are largge differences in hhist��orical and current�� consumptmp��ion ppatt����erns with��hin both��h developped and developpingg nat��ions as well as bet��ween sub-nat��ional ggovernmment��s, orgganizat��ions, and individuals. Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change 2 0 10. Desppit��e a failure of th��he gglobal commmmunit��y t��o reduce GHHG emmissions levels th��hat�� will pprevent�� climmat��e-chhangge caused dammagges hhumman hhealth��h, environmment��, pplant��s, animmals, and ecosyst��emms, somme nat��ions, sub-nat��ional levels of ggovernmment��, orgganizat��ions, businesses, educat��ional inst��it��ut��ions, and individuals hhave t��aken siggnificant�� st��epps reduce GHHG emmissions. Thhese st��epps oft��en included volunt��ary reduct��ions not�� required by law or reggulat��ion (Environmment��al FFinance, 2004).11. Under Kyot��o Prot��ocol, cert��ain developped nat��ions aggreed GHHG reduct��ion t��argget��s reduce emmissions levels fromm baseline year of 1990. Yet��, respponsibilit��y for hhumman-caused climmat��e chhangge hhas been expperienced th��hus far shhould also include att����ent��ion hhist��orical levels of GHHG emmissions earlier th��han 1990 (Migguez 2002; Muylaert�� and Pingguelli Rosa, 2002). 12. Under UNFFCCC several nat��ions mmade sppecific ppropposals on crit��eria define whhat�� pprincipples const��it��ut��e “equit��able” reduct��ions. Thhe IPCC ggroupped th��hemm as:a. Ad hoc proposals, includingg (1) divide t��ot��al emmissions int��o equal shhares bet��ween developped and developpingg nat��ions, and; (2) ppropport��ion GHHG allocat��ion a nat��ion’s GDP.b. Equal per capita proposals suggggest��ed by mmany developpingg nat��ions it�� nat��ional allocat��ions shhould be based uppon idea all beinggs shhould be ent��it��led an equal shhare of atm��mosphpheric commmmons.c. Status quo proposals forwarded by several developped nat��ions suggggest�� current�� emmissions shhould be recoggnized as ent��it��lemment��s. FFor exampmple, Unit��ed St��at��es only been willingg neggot��iat��e emmissions reduct��ions fromm current�� levels. Thhe just��ificat��ion ppresent��ed for pposit��ion is th��hose whho first�� used nat��ural resources a rightgh�� cont��inue use it�� at�� levels are based uppon ppast�� use.d. Mixed proposals suggggest��ed allocat��ion rules commbiningg equal pper cappit��a considerat��ions, equal ppercent��agge cut��s, st��at��us quo, and respponsibilit��y (Brown 2002; Rose, 1998; Müller 2001; Müller 2002).13. In addit��ion th��hese for equit��able allocat��ions, oth��hers ident��ified a nummber of oth��her argguably needed mmake equit��able allocat��ions of GHHG emmissions ammongg nat��ions. Thhese include: a. Polluter Pays and Proportionality Principles. Thhese would base allocat��ions uppon eachh nat��ion’s cont��ribut��ion dammagges caused by climmat��e chhangge.b. Satisfaction of Basic Needs. Thhis pprincipple urgges ppoorest�� nat��ions shhould be first�� in line receive allocat��ions needed mmeet�� basic needs of th��heir cit��izens, so it�� is ppossible for fully ppart��icippat��e in world.c. Comparable Burdens Principle. Thhis Principple would suggggest�� allocat��ions whhere eachh nat��ion shhare effort�� of reducingg emmissions safe levels equally, for exampmple, by allocat��ingg an equal of it��s GDP GHHG reduct��ion. d. Ability to Pay Principle. Thhis would richher nat��ions mmore respponsible ppoorer nat��ions because of ggreat��er abilit��y ppay reduce emmissions.e. Rawlsian Principle of Justice. Thhis suggggest��s allocat��ions shhould be det��ermmined suchh follow ppresumptmp��ion on just�� allocat��ions cont��ained in th��heories of Johhn Rawls in no case shhould nat��ions be worse off by any allocat��ion schhemme. FFurth��hermmore, somme arggue it�� arggues just�� allocat��ion schhemmes shhould ggive mmaximmumm rightgh��s use atm��mosphphere ppoorest��, least�� advant��agged ppeopple. (Brown, 2002: Rose, 1998).2 1 B. Ethical Analysis of Issue Three1. Not�� all ppropposals by nat��ions t��o define “equit��y” under UNFFCCC, Tit��le 3 are ent��it��led equal resppect�� as a mmatt����er of eth��hics and just��ice. 2. Thhose whho advocat��e th��hat�� GHHG emmissions allocat��ions shhould be based uppon st��at��us quo emmissions levels suggggest�� somme nat��ions shhould be ggiven a rightgh�� in th��he cont��inued use of atm��mosphphere as a sink on basis of th��heir pprior use. HHowever, th��here are serious eth��hical pproblemms with��h th��his view, includingg followingg:a. Unlike somme nat��ural resources suchh as wat��er, gglobal atm��mosphphere hhas never been recoggnized as a subject�� of pprivat��e pproppert��y rightgh��s. Rath��her, it�� been viewed as a commmmons available for use by all ppeopple,b. Thhose whho mmay be hharmmed by levels of GHHGs in atm��mosphphere hhave never consent��ed apppproppriat��ion of atm��mosphphere as GHHG sink, andc. Thhe idea of recoggnizingg rightgh��s in nat��ural resources ggained hhighgher value th��hroughgh labor is not�� apppplicable atm��mosphphere because line of th��hinkingg is based on assumptmp��ions th��hat��:i. th ��here will be sufficient�� quant��it��ies of nat��ural resource left�� over for oth��hers for use, whhichh is not�� t��rue of atm��mosphpheric GHHG sinks, ii. ��he ppersons claimmingg rightgh��s nat��ural resources increased it��s value labor, hhowever in case of atm��mosphpheric sinks th��hey rath��her dimminishhed value of atm��mosphphere, iii. int��ernat��ional law pprohhibit��s use of resources in one count��ry in suchh a way it�� will hharmm ppeopple in oth��her count��ries, and iv. ��he nat��ions of world already aggreed mmust�� reduce use of atm��mosphpheric sinks on basis of “equit��y.”3. To adequat��ely address issues of equit��y in allocat��ingg GHHG t��argget��s ammongg nat��ions involves issues of dist��ribut��ive just��ice. Tradit��ional dist��ribut��ive just��ice demmands benefit��s and burdens of ppublic ppolicy be dist��ribut��ed accordingg conceptp��s of equalit��y, mmodified only by mmorally relevant�� considerat��ions of, for exampmple, need or mmerit��.4. Dist��ribut��ive just��ice pput��s burden on th��hose whho want�� be t��reat��ed different��ly fromm oth��hers shhow basis for beingg different��ly is based on relevant�� crit��eria. FFor reason, as a of dist��ribut��ive just��ice, whho pproppose a formmula for definingg equit��y is not�� based uppon ggivingg all equal rightgh��s use atm��mosphphere burden of pprovingg differences in t��reatm��ment�� demmand are based on mmerit��, deservedness, or oth��her relevant�� crit��eria.5. O One dist��inct��ion dist��ribut��ive just��ice would acknowledgge as a relevant�� basis for t��reat��ingg nat��ions different��ly in GHHG emmissions allocat��ions is differences in respponsibilit��y for causingg exist��ingg pproblemm. Thherefore, “ppollut��er-ppays” pprincipple is consist��ent�� with��h pprincipples of dist��ribut��ive just��ice because ppollut��ers deserve ggreat��er respponsibilit��ies for cause. 6. Anoth��her dist��inct��ion dist��ribut��ive just��ice would acknowledgge as a relevant�� basis for nat��ions different��ly in GHHG emmissions allocat��ions is differences in needs and cappacit��ies. Developpingg count��ries whhere cit��izens cannot�� mmeet�� basic needs deserve smmaller respponsibilit��ies th��han oth��her count��ries.7. An equal pper cappit��a allocat��ion would be consist��ent�� with��h of just��ice because: (a) it�� t��reat��s all individuals as equals and th��herefore is consist��ent�� with��h mmost�� th��heories of dist��ribut��ive Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change 22 just��ice, (b) it�� would impmplemment�� th��he eth��hical mmaximm th��hat�� all ppeopple shhould hhave equal rightgh��s t��o use gglobal commmmons, (c) it�� would impmplemment�� widely acceptp��ed “ppollut��er-ppays” pprincipple, and (d) it�� would recoggnize need of developpingg count��ries increase th��heir emmissions mmeet�� basic needs of cit��izen. 8. Equit��y and just��ice demmand ppolicy mmakers exammine whheth��her th��hose whho are hharmmed by ppublic decisions on allocat��ions of burdens and benefit��s are beingg t��reat��ed fairly. FFor th��his reason, all whho would be affect��ed by GHHG allocat��ion schhemmes a rightgh�� fair reppresent��at��ion in decision mmakingg about�� GHHG allocat��ions.9. Thhe UNFFCCC hhas est��ablishhed normm nat��ions shhould reduce emmissions on basis of “equit��y.” Thhis shhould be considered a mminimmumm normmat��ive requiremment��, be int��erppret��ed in cont��ext�� of oth��her eth��hical and just��ice considerat��ions relevant�� dist��ribut��ingg benefit��s and burdens.10. Allocat��ingg GHHG t��argget��s ammongg nat��ions is a classic pproblemm of dist��ribut��ive just��ice. Tradit��ional dist��ribut��ive just��ice demmands benefit��s and burdens of be dist��ribut��ed accordingg conceptp��s of equalit��y, mmodified only by mmorally relevant�� considerat��ions of, for exampmple, need or mmerit��.11. Phhilosophpher Johhn Rawls suggggest��ed pprincipples of just��ice shhould be followed in allocat��ingg societ��y’s burdens and benefit��s are would be aggreed uppon by rat��ional self-int��erest��ed ppersons behhind a “veil of iggnorance” about�� pposit��ions in societ��y. In lightgh��, would adoptp�� GHHG reduct��ion allocat��ion schhemmes ggive mmaximmumm rightgh��s use atm��mosphphere ppoorest��, least��-advant��agged (Rawls, 1999).12. Efficient�� solut��ions mmay not�� be just�� solut��ions. Propposals for definingg equit��y on basis of efficiency alone are inconsist��ent�� with��h of dist��ribut��ive just��ice. Thhis is so because, ammongg oth��her reasons, equit��y is iggnored in welfare mmaximmizat��ion formmulae whhichh do not�� include compmpensat��ion losers. Allocat��ion schhemmes based uppon welfare crit��eria alone or cost�� nat��ional econommies alone raise several addit��ional eth��hical pproblemms. (See discussion of Issue FFive below on cost��.)13. As ammount�� of hhumman-caused t��empmperat��ure increases been expperienced th��hus far is linked hhist��orical levels of GHHG emmissions earlier th��han 1990, 1990 baseline level adoptp��ed in Kyot��o Prot��ocol as a mmatt����er of equit��y is not�� necessarily det��ermminat��ive of ppoint�� in t��imme at�� whhichh respponsibilit��y for reducingg GHHG emmissions is t��riggggered. In fact��, level of emmissions of GHHG fromm count��ries is a relevant�� fact�� could be considered in det��ermminingg respponsibilit��y for GHHG emmissions alongg with��h oth��her eth��hically relevant�� considerat��ions. 14. Alth��houghgh mmost�� developpingg count��ries cont��ribut��ed compmparat��ively smmall ammount��s elevat��ed levels of GHHGs in atm��mosphphere att����ribut��able hhumman act��ivit��ies, any developpingg nat��ion whhichh exceeds it��s fair shhare of t��ot��al GHHG emmissions int��erfere with��h rightgh��s of oth��her life, hhealth��h, and securit��y of oth��hers needs t��ake act��ion mmaint��ain emmissions levels below it��s fair shhare of safe emmissions. In addit��ion, th��here is an eth��hical impmperat��ive eachh developpingg nat��ion mmake every effort�� supppport�� sust��ainable developmpment�� ppract��ices. Developped nat��ions a simmilar impmperat��ive mmove sust��ainable ppract��ices ensure th��hey are sat��isfyingg basic needs and enhhancingg qualit��y of life with��hin nat��ions with��hout�� compmprommisingg qualit��y of life of fut��ure ggenerat��ions. It�� shhould be not��ed, hhowever, obliggat��ion of developpingg nat��ions reduce emmissions shhould not�� be const��rued as a limmit��at��ion on any developpingg nat��ion’s rightgh��s relevant�� arggumment��s about�� whhat�� const��it��ut��es nat��ions fair shhare of emmissions.23 15. Since th��here are largge differences ammongg ppart��ies in both��h developpingg and developped nat��ions in hhist��orical and current�� consumptmp��ion ppatt����erns, mmay be a need for nat��ions t��o allocat��e respponsibilit��y for GHHG emmissions ammongg sub-nat��ional ggovernmment��s, orgganizat��ions, and individuals based uppon mmorally relevant�� pprincipples of just��ice and equit��y.16. Alth��houghgh nat��ions are respponsible for reducingg GHHG emmissions under th��he UNFFCCC, sub-nat��ional businesses, orgganizat��ions, individuals are also respponsible for reducingg GHHG emmissions levels th��hat�� const��it��ut��e th��heir fair shhare of just�� nat��ional emmissions. Alth��houghgh nat��ions allocat��e emmissions reduct��ions burdens with��hin eachh nat��ion based uppon equit��y assure nat��ional emmissions t��argget��s are not�� exceeded, ggiven sub-nat��ional businesses, orgganizat��ions, and individuals can volunt��arily reduce GHHG emmissions levels below fair shhare and since suchh reduct��ions would reduce th��hreat��s commingg fromm gglobal emmissions, all sub-nat��ional businesses, orgganizat��ions, and individuals shhould be encouragged reduce GHHG emmissions lowest�� levels ppract��ical not��with��hst��andingg th��hese emmission levels would be lower th��han fair shhare of t��ot��al nat��ional emmissions. In th��his reggard, abilit��y mmake reduct��ions is an eth��hically relevant�� considerat��ion for det��ermminingg reduct��ion respponsibilit��y.Issues to be Developed1. Researchh is needed on eth��hical issues are ent��ailed by fact�� atm��mosphphere is ggenerally considered be “commmmons” resources. Does, for inst��ance, use of ppublic commmmons resources ent��ail equal access of all cit��izens use of resource, use of “ppollut��er-ppays” pprincipple, limmit��at��ions on pproppert��y rightgh��s, et��c.? Does fact�� atm��mosphphere is a commmmons limmit�� pprivat��e claimms includingg mmarket�� based t��radingg in commmmons resources? Thhe normmat��ive siggnificance and mmoral impmplicat��ions of “commmmons” mmerit�� furth��her discussion. 2. Shhould “t��rust��” doct��rine be apppplied atm��mosphphere? If so whhat�� normmat��ive siggnificance in reggard allocat��ion of rightgh��s use atm��mosphphere as a carbon sink are ent��ailed by t��rust�� doct��rine. 3. Whhat��, if any, use of “efficiency” or “welfare mmaximmizat��ion” ggoals are apppproppriat��e considerat��ions could be int��eggrat��ed in any allocat��ion schhemme aft��er basic rightgh��s considerat��ions are fulfilled?4. H How could a fair and equit��able syst��emm of emmission evolve over t��imme?V. Ethical Issue Four: The Use of Scientific Uncertainty in Policy Making — What is the ethical significance of the need to make climate change decisions in the face of scientific uncertainty? A. Factual Context1. Governmment��s, corpporat��ions, and individuals hhave oft��en used scient��ific uncert��aint��y about�� climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s as just��ificat��ion for lack of act��ion on climmat��e chhangge. In mmakingg arggumment��s, somme ppropponent��s seek avoid cost��ly respponses not�� be necessary if climmat��e chhangge ppredict��ions t��urn out�� be erroneous.Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change 24 2. In 1988, with��h supppport�� fromm nat��ions around th��he world, World HHealth��h OOrgganizat��ion and Unit��ed Nat��ions Environmment�� Proggramm creat��ed IPCC. Thhe IPCC’s mmission is t��o review ppeer-reviewed science on climmat��e chhangge and mmake recommmmendat��ions on climmat��e chhangge science ggovernmment��s. More sppecifically, IPCC is exppect��ed assess for int��ernat��ional commmmunit��y scient��ific, t��echhnical, and socio-econommic informmat��ion relevant�� for underst��andingg of risk and solut��ions for hhumman-induced climmat��e chhangge. Thhe IPCC hhas issued th��hree mmajor repport��s on climmat��e chhangge science in 1990, 1997, and 2002 (IPCC, 1990, 1995, 2001). 3. Begginningg with��h it��s first�� repport�� in 1990, IPCC urgged count��ries are t��ake immmmediat��e act��ions reduce risks of climmat��e chhangge desppit��e scient��ific uncert��aint��ies about�� t��immingg and mmaggnit��ude of climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s (IPCC, 1990).4. In 1990, at�� world Conference of Climmat��e Chhangge in Geneva, over 700 scient��ist��s fromm around world reviewed first�� IPCC repport��. FFollowingg th��his review, th��hese scient��ist��s issued a Scientist’s Declaration in whhichh th��hey said: “A clear scient��ific consensus emmergged under leadershhipp of IPCC on est��immat��es of rangge of warmmingg th��hat�� can be exppect��ed in 21st�� Cent��ury” (IPCC, 1990). 5. Thhe IPCC’s Second Assessmment�� Repport�� was issued in 1995. In repport��, IPCC, as it�� hhad before, exhhaust��ively summmmarized st��at��e of scient��ific knowledgge on induced climmat��e chhangge, mmade sppecific ppredict��ions about�� risk of climmat��e chhangge, and discussed mmit��iggat��ion optp��ions (IPCC, 1995).6. O One of mmany conclusions cont��ained in IPCC’s second assessmment�� repport�� was a “balance of evidence shhowed a discernable hhumman influence on climmat��e.” In oth��her words, not�� only IPCC found climmat��e chhangge was a subst��ant��ial and real th��hreat��, a conclusion IPCC reachhed in it��s first�� repport�� in 1990, by 1995 it�� concluded balance of evidence att����ribut��ed somme act��ual climmat��e chhangge act��ivit��ies desppit��e ggreat�� nat��ural variabilit��y in climmat��e syst��emm. Thhat�� is, caused chhangges climmat��e syst��emm were already observable by 1995 by balance of evidence (IPCC, 1995).7. In FFebruary of 2001, IPCC’s th��hird assessmment�� repport�� was released. Thhis assessmment�� repport��, like oth��hers released in 1990 and 1995, sppecific about�� hhow act��ions would chhangge gglobal climmat��e and climmat��e chhangge would affect�� hhealth��h and environmment��. Thhe assessmment�� confirmmed and exppanded uppon pprevious IPCC repport��s and concluded th��here was addit��ional evidence induced climmat��e chhangge already becomme not��iceable around world (IPCC, 2001).8. In eachh of it��s repport��s, IPCC ident��ified increasingg levels of scient��ific confidence in connect��ion bet��ween act��ivit��ies and observable climmat��e chhangge whhile mmakingg with��h increasingg levels of cert��aint��y on and of climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s. Neverth��heless, somme scient��ific uncert��aint��y about�� and of climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s remmained.9. In recent�� years, scient��ific inst��it��ut��ions, whhose mmemmbers’ exppert��ise bears direct��ly on climmat��e chhangge science, hhave issued st��at��emment��s in supppport�� of IPCC. FFor exampmple, Nat��ional Academmy of Sciences repport��, Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions, concluded IPCC assessmment��s are a fair and accurat��e summmmary of scient��ific th��hinkingg. OthO��her scient��ific orgganizat��ions with��h exppert��ise on climmat��e issues also supppport�� IPCC conclusions. inst��ance, Thhe Ammerican Met��eorologgical Societ��y, Ammerican Geophphysical Union, and Ammerican Associat��ion for Advancemment�� of Science all issued 2 5 st��at��emment��s th��hat�� are consist��ent�� with��h IPCC conclusions hhummans are mmodifyingg th��he climmat��e syst��emm (OOreskes, 2005).10. In addit��ion, observat��ions hhave been mmade both��h direct��ly and th��hroughgh a rangge of reliable t��echhniques for indirect�� mmeasuremment��s clearly est��ablishh earth��h’s t��empmperat��ure is chhanggingg in ways are consist��ent�� with��h IPCC ppredict��ions. 11. F For th��hese reasons, int��ernat��ional scient��ific commmmunit��y hhas developped a consensus pposit��ion hhumman-induced warmmingg is already causingg somme dammagge t��o somme pplaces and ppeopple around world. HHowever, uncert��aint��ies remmain about�� mmaggnit��ude and t��immingg of fut��ure warmmingg and associat��ed impmpact��s.12. Siggnificant�� scient��ific uncert��aint��ies exist�� in att����emptmp��ingg ppredict�� fut��ure gglobal warmmingg impmpact��s will be creat��ed by different�� levels of atm��mosphpheric GHHG concent��rat��ions, an issue mmust�� be faced in det��ermminingg atm��mosphpheric GHHG st��abilizat��ion t��argget��s (Lemmons, 1996).13. To deal with��h remmainingg uncert��aint��ies about�� remmainingg climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s, IPCC est��ablishhed likely rangges of chhangges and impmpact��s. Even if t��empmperat��ures and impmpact��s are expperienced t��urn out�� be at�� lower end of rangge of IPCC ppredict��ions, somme and somme ecosyst��emms will be hharmmed by climmat��e chhangge. Yet�� somme mmay benefit�� fromm climmat��e chhangge due longger ggrowingg seasons, somme arid and semmi arid zones becommingg wett����er, and increased ggrowth��h in somme pplant��s because of hhighgher levels of COO2, for exampmple (IPCC, 2001).14. IPCC’s ppredict��ions about�� climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s are by IPCC in reliance on a nummber of climmat��e mmodels. Thhese mmodels assumme climmat��e syst��emm will react�� in mmath��hemmat��ically describable ppatt����erns so and associat��ed impmpact��s resppond in ppropport��ion atm��mosphpheric GHHG concent��rat��ions whhichh are slowly risingg in respponse increases in GHHG emmissions. Yet��, IPCC acknowledgges th��here are a nummber of pplausible mmore rappid non-linear respponses of climmat��e syst��emm are not�� fully reppresent��ed in could lead ppot��ent��ially cat��ast��rophphic impmpact��s at�� least�� for somme in world. Thhese non-linear respponses of climmat��e syst��emm are ggenerally referred as “climmat��e surpprises.” If somme of climmat��e surpprises occur, th��hen climmat��e chhangge would be mmuchh largger and rappid th��han th��hose described in IPCC’s Climmat��e surpprises of concern include: (a) abruptp�� chhangges in ocean circulat��ion ppatt����erns; (b) largge releases of mmeth��hane fromm mmelt��ingg ppermmafrost��, (c) largge sudden increases in sea level caused by breakupp of ppolar ice, and, (d) non-linear respponses of earth��h’s carbon cycle.15. Thhe longger world wait��s t��ake siggnificant�� act��ion reduce GHHG emmissions, hharder it�� will be st��abilize ggreenhhouse ggases in atm��mosphphere at�� levels pprevent�� danggerous int��erference with��h climmat��e syst��emm. 16. If ggovernmment��s wait�� unt��il all uncert��aint��ies about�� climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s are resolved and consensus view of climmat��e chhangge science t��urns out�� be correct��, it�� is likely be t��oo lat��e cat��ast��rophphic dammagges fromm induced climmat��e chhangge.17. Even if it�� were ppossible st��abilize GHHG atm��mosphpheric concent��rat��ions at�� current�� levels, because of laggs in climmat��e syst��emm, earth��h will cont��inue hheat�� upp causingg addit��ional climmat��e chhangge dammagges in years and decades ahhead.Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change 2 6 18. It�� is unlikely th��hat�� atm��mosphpheric levels of carbon dioxide equivalent�� can be st��abilized mmuchh below 450 ppmppm duringg th��his cent��ury and th��hus siggnificant�� addit��ional warmmingg is virt��ually gguarant��eed in cent��ury (Baer and Ath��hanasiou, 2005).19. Dammagges already beingg expperienced by somme ppeopple are of mmany t��yppes includingg, but�� are not�� limmit��ed t��o, death��h, disease, and ecologgical hharmm fromm floods and droughtgh��s, vect��or bone disease, risingg seas, st��ormms, and increased hheat�� waves. 20. As st��at��ed ppreviously, somme of th��he ppoorest�� around world are mmost�� vulnerable t��o climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s. (See discussion above on respponsibilit��y, Issue OOne.)21. In reggard scient��ific uncert��aint��y about�� climmat��e chhangge, nat��ions of UNFFCCC aggreed follow “pprecaut��ionary pprincipple,” a gguide act��ingg in face of scient��ific uncert��aint��y, whhichh hhas been adoptp��ed in oth��her t��reat��ies deal with��h uncert��ain but�� risky behhavior. (Brown, 2003) As we hhave seen, art��icle 3 of UNFFCCC st��at��es in relevant�� ppart��: Thhe Part��ies shhould t��ake mmeasures ant��icippat��e, pprevent��, or mminimmize causes of climmat��e chhangge and mmit��iggat��e it��s adverse effect��s. Whhere th��here are th��hreat��s of serious or irreversible dammagge, lack of full scient��ific cert��aint��y shhould not�� be used as a reason for ppostp��poningg suchh mmeasures, t��akingg int��o account�� ppolicies and deal with��h climmat��e chhangge shhould be cost��-effect��ive so as ensure gglobal benefit��s at�� lowest�� ppossible cost�� (UN,1992a, Art��. 3).B. Ethical Analysis of Issue Four1. Decision mmakingg in face of scient��ific uncert��aint��y about�� climmat��e chhangge raises impmport��ant�� eth��hical quest��ions. Thhis is so because even if science could accurat��ely describe levels of risk, eth��hical quest��ions about�� acceptp��abilit��y of risk arise. Thhat�� is, fromm a scient��ific conclusion a climmat��e chhangge creat��es a ppart��icular th��hreat�� or risk, one cannot�� deduce whheth��her is acceptp��able with��hout�� first�� decidingg on cert��ain crit��eria for acceptp��abilit��y. Thhe crit��eria of acceptp��abilit��y mmust�� be underst��ood as an eth��hical rath��her th��han a scient��ific quest��ion. FFor inst��ance, alth��houghgh science mmay conclude cert��ain levels of GHHGs in atm��mosphphere creat��e a risk West�� Ant��arct��ic ice shheet�� mmelt�� and increase sea levels by mmet��ers, science cannot�� say whheth��her addit��ional risk is acceptp��able. Science is desiggned ident��ify and describes fact��s and cannot��, by it��self, ggenerat��e pprescriptp��ive gguidance. Thhe scient��ific underst��andingg of nat��ure of th��hreat��, of course, is not�� irrelevant�� eth��hical quest��ion of whheth��her risk is eth��hically acceptp��able, but�� science alone cannot�� t��ell societ��y whhat�� it�� shhould do about�� various th��hreat��s.2. Decision mmakers cannot�� avoid eth��hical quest��ions whhen faced with��h uncert��ain impmpact��s of hhumman act��ivit��ies includingg whho should bear burden of pproof about�� hharmm. To iggnore risks is decide exppose hhealth��h and environmment�� a leggit��immat��e is, a decision not�� act�� on a serious environmment��al risk consequences. FFurth��hermmore, science alone also cannot�� det��ermmine quant��it��y of shhould t��rigggger pprevent��at��ive act��ions. reason, climmat��e chhangge decisions in face of scient��ific uncert��aint��y about�� impmpact��s be underst��ood raise a mmixt��ure of eth��hical and scient��ific quest��ions.3. All eth��hical syst��emms concur th��hose whho enggagge in risky behhavior are not�� exonerat��ed simpmply because was uncert��aint��y involved in det��ermminingg whheth��her or not�� th��heir behhavior would act��ually cause dammagge. Thhere are laws impmplemment�� well-est��ablishhed normm. inst��ance, for a defendant�� be convict��ed of reckless drivingg or reckless endanggermment��, 2 7 a pprosecut��or simpmply hhas t��o pprove th��hat�� th��he defendant�� act��ed in a way hhe or shhe shhould hhave known be risky. Many t��yppes of risky behhavior are crimminal because societ��ies believe danggerous behhavior is irrespponsible and shhould not�� be condoned. FFurth��hermmore, eth��hical dut��y avoid risky behhavior is ppropport��ional mmaggnit��ude of ppot��ent��ial hharmm, ppart��icularly th��hose whho not�� consent��ed beingg pplaced at�� risk.4. Thherefore, as a mmatt����er of eth��hics, a relevant�� quest��ion in face of scient��ific uncert��aint��y about�� hharmmful consequences of hhumman behhavior is whheth��her th��here is a reasonable basis for concludingg serious hharmm oth��hers could result�� fromm behhavior. In case of climmat��e chhangge, scient��ist��s underst��ood of act��ivit��ies chhangge climmat��e for at�� least�� th��hirt��y years and known th��hese chhangges could hhummans, pplant��s, animmals, and ecosyst��emms. In addit��ion, for last�� t��went��y years, th��hreat�� of induced climmat��e chhangge hhealth��h and environmment�� been widely discussed in scient��ific lit��erat��ure. FFor mmore th��han a decade, IPCC, aft��er evaluat��ingg ppeer-reviewed science on climmat��e chhangge, been t��ellingg world ggreat�� fromm gglobal warmmingg is likely. th��his reason, climmat��e chhangge causingg act��ions const��it��ut��e risky behhavior is eth��hically unsupppport��able.5. F For reason, nat��ions cannot�� deny th��heir release of GHHGs creat��es a risk and environmment�� around world, even if one disaggrees with��h sppecific ppredict��ions of t��immingg and of warmmingg impmpact��s now beingg mmade by mmainst��reamm science. Thherefore, nat��ions emmitt����ingg siggnificant�� ammount��s of GHHGs been enggagged in risky behhavior and risky behhavior eth��hical siggnificance even if is uncert��aint��y about�� act��ual consequences.6. Because by end of 1980s was widesppread underst��andingg in scient��ific commmmunit��y of pposed by risingg concent��rat��ions of atm��mosphpheric GHHGs, was at�� least�� by th��hen a clear eth��hical dut��y act�� unless vict��imms of climmat��e chhangge or reppresent��at��ives ggave free informmed consent�� acceptp�� risk. 7. All mmajor eth��hical syst��emms would st��ronggly condemmn behhavior pposes serious risks th��hinggs hhummans hhold be of mmost�� value, i.e., life, hhealth��h, fammily, abilit��y mmake a livingg, commmmunit��y, and nat��ural environmment��. Desppit��e scient��ific uncert��aint��y about�� and of climmat��e chhangge th��hreat��s, is ggeneral scient��ific consensus caused chhangges climmat��e syst��emm are occurringg and th��hey pput�� ppeopples and environmment��s at�� serious risk. Because of hhighgh levels of and environmment��s, dut��y refrain fromm act��ivit��ies result�� in climmat��e chhangge is ext��raordinarily st��rongg. Thherefore, usingg scient��ific uncert��aint��y as an excuse for cont��inuingg increasingg atm��mosphpheric levels of GHHGs is eth��hically int��olerable.8. For above reasons, is eth��hical consensus arggumment�� a nat��ion need not�� reduce it��s GHHG emmissions because of scient��ific uncert��aint��y about�� consequences of and does not�� with��hst��and mminimmumm eth��hical scrut��iny because of:a. Thhe enormmous adverse impmpact��s on life, libert��y, and ppersonal securit��y, as well as on and environmment�� fromm induced climmat��e chhangge.b. Thhe disppropport��ionat��e effect��s on ppoorest�� ppeopple of world.c. Thhe real for ppot��ent��ially cat��ast��rophphic climmat��e surpprises mmuchh ggreat��er impmpact��s oft��en ppredict��ed rely on assumptmp��ions of smmooth��h, linear respponses climmat��e chhangge.d. Thhe fact�� of science of climmat��e chhangge pproblemm never been or is not�� now in dispput��e even if one acknowledgges uncert��aint��y about�� or of climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s.e. Thhe fact�� climmat��e chhangge dammagge is pprobably already beingg expperienced by somme ppeopple.Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change 28 f. Thhe st��rongg likelihhood th��hat�� serious and irreversible dammagge will be expperienced before all scient��ific uncert��aint��ies can be elimminat��ed. gg. Thhe fact�� th��he longger nat��ions wait�� t��o t��ake act��ion, mmore difficult�� it�� will be st��abilize GHHGs at�� levels whhichh don’t�� creat��e serious dammagge hhummans, pplant��s, animmals, and ecosyst��emms. hh. Thhe fact�� nat��ions aggreed in UNFFCCC not�� use scient��ific uncert��aint��y as an excuse for inact��ion on climmat��e chhangge whhen th��hey aggreed pprecaut��ionary pprincipple.i. Thhe fact�� th��hose mmost�� vulnerable climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s hhave not�� consent��ed risk impmposed by climmat��e chhangge.9. Because nat��ions consent��ed be bound by pprincipple in relat��ion climmat��e chhangge science, failure apppply in developpingg climmat��e chhangge ppolicies also violat��es eth��hical normm a nat��ion shhould keepp it��s pprommises.10. Nat��ions a dut��y consider all pplausible adverse climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s in sett����ingg ppolicy includingg low pprobabilit��y hhighgh consequence impmpact��s. In det��ermminingg whheth��her low pprobabilit��y, consequence impmpact��s are acceptp��able, nat��ions need pprovide opppport��unit��y for vulnerable climmat��e chhangge ppart��icippat��e in th��his decision (Brown, 2003).11. As remmainingg scient��ific uncert��aint��ies about�� climmat��e chhangge are larggely about�� t��immingg and mmaggnit��ude of climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s rath��her th��han about�� whheth��her hhumman act��ivit��ies are chhanggingg climmat��e syst��emm, th��hese scient��ific uncert��aint��ies cannot�� be eth��hically just��ified limmit�� obliggat��ions reduce GHHG emmissions are already hharmmingg somme ppeopple and pplaces and creat��ingg addit��ional th��hreat��s for mmillions of around world whho not�� consent��ed be pput�� at�� risk. Issues to be Developed1. Because th��here is a need apppport��ion liabilit��y for unavoidable climmat��e chhangge dammagges (see Issue OOne above), ggiven scient��ific confidence about�� adverse impmpact��s fromm climmat��e chhangge hhas increased over t��imme, fut��ure work on eth��hical dimmensions of climmat��e chhangge scient��ific uncert��aint��y shhould exammine whhen science of climmat��e chhangge hhad becomme cert��ain enoughgh creat��e dut��ies act��. Several optp��ions for assiggningg respponsibilit��y for climmat��e chhangge exist��. Thhey include once climmat��e chhangge was first�� recoggnized be a th��hreat�� by scient��ific commmmunit��y in 1930s, whhen scient��ific commmmunit��y beggan mmeasure rise of GHHGs in atm��mosphphere in lat��e 1950s, whhen first�� mmodels st��art��ed ppredict�� serious warmmingg in lat��e 1970s, whhen mmany nat��ions beggan call for serious emmissions reduct��ions in mmiddle 1980s, whhen first�� IPCC repport�� concluded climmat��e chhangge science was a real in 1990, et��c. Alth��houghgh it�� mmay not�� be ppossible draw clear lines around event��s, arggumment��s about�� normmat��ive respponsibilit��y at�� various t��immes could be developped. 2. In law, is a not��ion “willful iggnorance” of a st��at��e of affairs can not�� be used as just��ificat��ion for cont��inuingg hharmmful behhavior. Thhere is a need developp eth��hical basis for pposit��ion and det��ermmine hhow it�� apppplies climmat��e chhangge. 3. In somme cases in face of uncert��aint��y, it�� is pprudent�� act�� incremment��ally. Are incremment��al apppproachhes climmat��e chhangge eth��hically just��ified and if so whhat�� eth��hical pproblemms and considerat��ions about�� incremment��al apppproachhes are th��here?2 9 VI. Ethical Issue Five: Cost to National Economies — Is the commonly used justification of cost to a national economy for delaying or minimizing actions to reduce the threat of climate change ethically justified?A. Factual context 1. Somme nat��ions hhave resist��ed calls t��o reduce GHHG emmissions usingg t��wo arggumment��s th��hat�� involve cost��s th��he nat��ion. Thhe first�� is cost��s nat��ional econommy of reducingg emmissions th��hroughgh pproggramms would achhieve t��argget��ed emmissions reduct��ions are excessive. Thhe second is cost��-benefit�� analysis (CBA) does not�� just��ify reduce GHHG emmissions (Brown, 2002)..2. Somme nat��ions just��ified non-act��ion on climmat��e chhangge on basis of cost�� th��heir nat��ional econommies alone. In usingg cost�� as an excuse in th��his way, nat��ions iggnored ppot��ent��ial hharmms oth��her nat��ions fromm climmat��e chhangge. 3. Nat��ions refusingg commmmit�� GHHG reduct��ions based uppon cost�� usually not�� considered dut��y reduce emmissions as mmatt����er of just��ice. 4. Somme nat��ions used CBAs as a pprescriptp��ive t��ool for det��ermminingg acceptp��able apppproachhes nat��ional gglobal warmmingg ppolicy and on basis limmit��ed commmmitm��ment��s reduce emmissions (Brown, 2002).5. Thhe use of CBA as a evaluat��e climmat��e chhangge optp��ions can lead iggnoringg obliggat��ions reduce GHHG emmissions if result��s of CBA are used pprescriptp��ively exclusion of oth��her considerat��ions.6. Thhe use of CBA as a evaluat��e climmat��e chhangge optp��ions oft��en include calculat��ions aggggreggat��e cost��s and benefit��s whhile iggnoringg hhow cost��s and benefit��s are dist��ribut��ed ammongg th��hose whho will be affect��ed by climmat��e chhangge ppolicies.7. CBA calculat��ions det��ermmine value of environmment��al and social benefit��s derived fromm climmat��e chhangge optp��ions oft��en assumme value of benefit��s can be det��ermmined on basis of “willinggness-t��o-ppay” mmeasuremment��s det��ermmined in mmarket�� t��ransact��ions or oth��her shhadow-att����emptmp�� est��immat��e whhat�� ppeopple would ppay for th��hinggs for whhichh th��here is not�� adequat��e mmarket��-pprice evidence. 8. CBA of climmat��e chhangge optp��ions oft��en att����emptmp�� consider t��imme-value of mmoney in mmakingg quant��it��at��ive assessmment�� of benefit��s by apppplyingg discount�� rat��es fut��ure benefit��s. Propponent��s of discount��ingg in CBA urgge value of fut��ure environmment��al benefit��s be det��ermmined in samme way apppplies value fut��ure event��s, is by underst��andingg ppresent�� value of fut��ure benefit��s. Whhen suchh discount��ingg occurs, benefit��s fromm climmat��e chhangge optp��ions will accrue far in fut��ure are ggiven litt����le value. Suchh an apppproachh mmakes current�� invest��ors’ int��erest��s, not�� fut��ure ggenerat��ions’ welfare, focus of concern (Banuri et�� al., 1996). 9. CBA calculat��ions about�� climmat��e chhangge optp��ions usually mmust�� confront�� considerable scient��ific uncert��aint��y about�� suchh issues as mmuchh t��empmperat��ure chhangge and associat��ed impmpact��s on hhumman hhealth��h and environmment�� will be caused by different�� levels of GHHGs in atm��mosphphere. OOft��en CBAs dealt�� with��h uncert��aint��y by assummingg mmid-level ppredict��ions of likely impmpact��s whhile iggnoringg pplausible hhighgher and lower levels of impmpact��s. In addit��ion, CBAs ppreppared for use in climmat��e chhangge analyses sommet��immes assummed climmat��e will Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change 3 0 resppond t��o increased GHHGs in a smmooth��h, mmost��ly linear, fashhion. Yet�� mmany scient��ist��s believe th��hat�� th��he climmat��e mmay resppond rappidly GHHG forcingg with��h ppot��ent��ially cat��ast��rophphic consequences.10. Because of differences in mmeth��hodologgical assumptmp��ions, CBAs mmade by different�� ppart��ies on samme ppolicy optp��ions oft��en differ widely in th��heir conclusions about�� mmaggnit��ude of cost��s and benefit��s. 11. Meth��hodologgical assumptmp��ions emmbedded in CBA calculat��ions of climmat��e chhangge optp��ions are usually not�� discussed with��h ppot��ent��ial vict��imms of climmat��e chhangge. Many assumptmp��ions are value-laden and mmust�� be addressed by eth��hical reflect��ion.12. In det��ermminingg cost�� of emmission reduct��ion st��rat��eggies, CBAs sommet��immes rely on known t��echhniques or t��echhnologgies for reducingg GHHG emmissions whhose cost��s and effect��iveness are relat��ively easy est��immat��e suchh as sppecific emmissions reduct��ions t��echhnologgies, cost��s of carbon credit��s, or t��axat��ion apppproachhes will creat��e incent��ives reduce GHHG emmissions. Alth��houghgh reliance on th��hese or facilit��at��e est��immat��ion of cost��s because of relat��ive ease of cost�� est��immat��ion, reliance of known and lead iggnoringg emmissions reduct��ions st��rat��eggies whhose cost�� and efficacy be difficult�� mmeasure but�� could pprovide equivalent�� emmissions reduct��ions at�� siggnificant��ly lower cost��s. FFor inst��ance, oft��en ommitt����ed in CBA of climmat��e chhangge st��rat��eggies are energgy demmand side reduct��ions st��rat��eggies hhave oft��en pproduced siggnificant�� emmissions reduct��ions whhile savingg mmoney. 13. CBAs usually require all values of climmat��e chhangge benefit��s be t��ranslat��ed int��o dollars so th��hey be compmpared with��h cost��s. Suchh lead det��ermminingg value in mmonet��ary t��ermms for all th��hinggs includingg value of hhumman life and loss of an island civilizat��ion or sppecies. Yet�� th��hose whho will be hharmmed by hhumman-induced climmat��e chhangge are rarely consult��ed about�� whheth��her all values shhould be reduced values exppressed in mmarket�� t��ransact��ions or mmeth��hods for det��ermminingg value of can be by climmat��e chhangge.14. CBA origginally was developped as a t��echhnique compmpare alt��ernat��ive buildingg pproject��s whhose cost��s and benefit��s would be expperienced usually in a t��imme sppan of no mmore th��han fift��een t��went��y-five years and whhose benefit��s were relat��ively easy quant��ify because only direct�� cost��s and benefit��s of pproject�� were considered. HHowever, det��ermminingg benefit��s of gglobal warmmingg pproggramms is a mmuchh t��rickier pproblemm because of it��s t��echhnical compmplexit��y, t��yppe of be dammagged by warmmingg, and in whhichh dammagge occur. Det��ermminingg value of climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s is ppart��icularly difficult�� because of largge sppans for whhichh climmat��e dammagges be expperienced and ggreat�� scient��ific uncert��aint��ies be faced in ident��ifyingg hharmms will be caused by climmat��e chhangge. 15. Thhe fact�� th��here are different�� ppeopple whho expperience cost��s and benefit��s of climmat��e chhangge ppolicies is usually iggnored in discount��ingg pprocedures empmployed in CBAs.B. Ethical Analysis of Issue Five1. If nat��ions just��ify refusal t��ake act��ion reduce GHHG emmissions on basis of cost�� th��hemm alone, pposit��ion is eth��hically unsupppport��able because no pperson or nat��ion hhas a rightgh�� eith��her hharmm oth��hers as a mmeans achhieve econommic hhealth��h or endangger oth��hers’ life, hhealth��h, or securit��y. 3 1 2. Thhe use of cost�� as a basis for det��ermminingg th��he limmit��s of nat��ional respponsibilit��y t��o reduce GHHG emmissions (be dist��ingguishhed fromm use of cost�� det��ermmine least�� cost��ly mmeth��hods achhieve a sppecific ggoal) is eth��hically pproblemmat��ic because respponsibilit��y for reducingg emmissions shhould be derived fromm rightgh��s th��heories, pprincipples of dist��ribut��ive just��ice, not�� on cost�� ppollut��er. Cost�� can be a useful t��ool of analysis det��ermmine cost��-effect��iveness of ppolicy optp��ions and abilit��y-t��o-ppay can be a relevant�� considerat��ion in det��ermminingg equit��able levels of respponsibilit��y, but�� cost�� cannot�� be sole basis for det��ermminingg respponsibilit��y for GHHG emmissions as a mmatt����er of dist��ribut��ive just��ice. Alth��houghgh chhoosingg optp��ions on basis of mmaximmizingg net�� ppresent�� econommic welfare hhas been widely used by somme ggovernmment��s as just��ificat��ion for ggovernmment�� ppolicy, suchh an apppproachh is eth��hically whhen it�� leads depprivingg oth��hers of life, libert��y, and securit��y with��hout�� th��heir consent��. 3. A nat��ion’s use of CBA as a pprescriptp��ive just��ificat��ion for it��s unwillinggness reduce GHHG emmission levels consist��ent�� with��h just�� allocat��ions is eth��hically pproblemmat��ic. Thhis is so because suchh an apppproachh undermmines dut��ies th��hat�� nat��ions hhave refrain fromm causingg hharmm oth��hers and rightgh��s all ppeopple life, libert��y, and securit��y. 4. Since of just��ice would ggive all equal rightgh��s use atm��mosphphere in absence of mmorally relevant�� crit��eria would ent��it��le different�� levels of use, th��hose whho advocat��e use of cost�� as a basis for det��ermminingg respponsibilit��y for GHHG reduct��ions bear burden of ident��ifyingg relevant�� crit��eria just��ify use of cost�� of reduct��ions as a basis for det��ermminingg respponsibilit��y.5. CBAs aggggreggat��e cost��s and benefit��s in analyses of climmat��e chhangge ppolicies fail sat��isfy of just��ice require a just�� shharingg of hharmms and benefit��s ammongg whho will be affect��ed by climmat��e chhangge ppolicy.6. To use “willinggness-ppay” as exclusive mmeasure of value of benefit��s of climmat��e chhangge in CBAs can result�� in focus on one t��yppe of value at�� exppense of oth��her apppproachhes value. FFor inst��ance, as somme value syst��emms recoggnize inhherent�� value in life of somme livingg beinggs, an apppproachh only recoggnizes mmarket�� value of beinggs t��ransformms inhherent�� value int��o inst��rumment��al value, very th��hingg pprohhibit��ed by somme value syst��emms. Putt����ingg a pprice on sommeth��hingg shhould be pprot��ect��ed because of eth��hical dut��y can undermmine dut��y.7. Since rightgh��s be fromm life, hhealth��h, and securit��y, use of “willinggness-as of value of life, and securit��y of oth��hers whho not�� consent��ed th��his valuat��ion undermmines dut��ies do no oth��hers with��hout�� free, informmed consent��. 8. F Failure clearly ident��ify all mmeth��hodologgical assumptmp��ions in CBAs in det��ermminingg cost��s and benefit��s, in select��ingg whhichh reduct��ion st��rat��eggies will be considered in cost�� calculat��ions, and in det��ermminingg whhichh adverse climmat��e chhangge impmpact��s will be considered in benefit�� calculat��ions ggiven scient��ific uncert��aint��y about�� impmpact��s, violat��es of free informmed consent�� are required assure fair ppart��icippat��ion in climmat��e chhangge decision mmakingg. (See discussion below on fair decision mmakingg, Issue Eightgh��)9. Thhe det��ermminat��ion of value of benefit��s fromm climmat��e chhangge optp��ions by assummingg only mmid-level rangge ppot��ent��ial impmpact��s whhen mmore serious are pplausible is eth��hically if it�� leads act��ions are not�� sufficient�� avoid ggreat�� life, and securit��y of oth��hers not�� consent��ed failure consider all th��hemm. Ethical Dimensions of Climate Change 32 10. Because discount��ingg benefit��s in CBA assummes only cont��empmporary invest��or-individuals’ int��erest��s count�� in det��ermminingg worth��h, discount��ingg t��echhniques in CBA can violat��e int��erest��s of fut��ure ggenerat��ions t��o hhave a gglobal climmat��e syst��emm th��hat�� hhas not�� been deggraded by hhumman act��ivit��ies. Since nat��ions aggreed in th��he adoptp��ingg UNFFCCC pprot��ect�� int��erest��s of fut��ure ggenerat��ions, discount��ingg benefit��s and hharmms in CBAs can violat��e dut��y of nat��ions keepp pprommises mmade in t��reat��ies.11. Cost�� and benefit�� calculat��ions in CBAs are used just��ify ppolicy respponses climmat��e chhangge not�� been consent��ed by vict��imms of climmat��e chhangge raises serious pproblemms of pprocedural just��ice. Issues to be Developed1. Addit��ional eth��hical analysis is needed of sppecific CBAs are beingg used as pprescriptp��ive gguidance of climmat��e chhangge ppolicies. 2. Addit��ional eth��hical analysis is needed see if “efficiency” or “welfare mmaximmizat��ion” object��ives can be int��eggrat��ed int��o nat��ional ppolicies on GHHG emmissions also are based uppon oth��her eth��hically just��ifiable crit��eria for det��ermminingg 3. Eth��hical analysis is needed det��ermmine whhat�� ext��ent�� is “abilit��y ppay” for GHHG reduct��ions a relevant�� crit��erion for est��ablishhingg respponsibilit��y for GHHG emmissions. VII. Ethical Issue Six: Independent Responsibility to Act — Is the commonly used justification for delaying or minimizing climate change action that any government need not act until all others agree on action ethically justified?A. Factual Context1. Somme arggued nat��ions no respponsibilit��y reduce th��heir GHHG emmissions unt��il oth��her nat��ions aggree reduce emmissions.2. Somme developpingg nat��ions arggue th��hey not�� mmajor cont��ribut��ions climmat��e chhangge pproblemm and shhould not�� be exppect��ed t��ake act��ion unt��il developped count��ries reduced emmissions.3. Somme count��ries likely be hheavily impmpact��ed by climmat��e chhangge say act��ion mmust�� be t��aken now limmit�� GHHG emmissions.4. Somme impmpact��s of climmat��e chhangge are already hhappppeningg, ppart��icularly in Arct��ic reggion. 5. Climmat��e chhangge will benefit�� somme ppoppulat��ions and areas of world and hharmm oth��hers and is likely chhangge current�� ppatt����erns of wealth��h and well-beingg in world.6. Act��ions slow climmat��e chhangge will benefit�� somme and areas of world and oth��hers and are likely chhangge current�� dist��ribut��ion of wealth��h and well-beingg in world (IPCC, 2001). 33 7. Nat��ions differ in levels of GHHG emmissions, whheth��her mmeasured by t��ot��al emmissions, pper cappit��a emmissions, or emmission unit�� of GDP. 8. Developped nat��ions are respponsible for th��he mmajorit��y of ppast�� and current�� ggreenhhouse emmissions.9. Developpingg count��ries will soon surppass developped nat��ions in GHHG emmissions, but�� cappit��a emmissions in developped count��ries are likely t��o exceed cappit��a emmissions in developpingg count��ries for foreseeable fut��ure. 10. Under UNFFCCC, developped nat��ions aggreed th��hat�� th��hey would reduce GHHG emmissions on basis of equit��y pprevent�� danggerous anth��hroppoggenic int��erference with��h climmat��e syst��emm. Thhe developped nat��ions also aggreed would “t��ake lead in commbat��ingg climmat��e chhangge and adverse effect��s th��hereof” (UN, 1992a, Art��. 3).11. Under UNFFCCC, Annex 1 Part��ies aggreed “adoptp�� nat��ional ppolicies and corresppondingg mmeasures on mmit��iggat��ion of climmat��e chhangge, by limmit��ingg it��s anth��hroppoggenic emmissions of ggases and pprot��ect��ingg and enhhancingg it��s ggas sinks and reservoirs” (UN, 1992a, Art��. 3(2) (a)). Thhe and be adoptp��ed are not�� sppecified (UN, 1992a, Art��. 3). 12. Thhe UNFFCCC does not�� pprovide sppecific t��imme or ammount�� commmmitm��ment��s for emmissions reduct��ions, but�� does say shhould be done “with��h aimm of ret��urningg individually or joint��ly th��heir 1990 levels th��hese anth��hroppoggenic emmissions of carbon dioxide and oth��her not�� cont��rolled by Mont��real Prot��ocol” (UN 1992 a, Art��. 3(2)(b)). 13. Thhe UNFFCCC acknowledgges nat�