Fairness on the Day after Tomorrow: Justice, Reciprocity and Global Climate Change

Climate change raises important questions of global distributive justice, which can be defined as the issue of how benefits and burdens should be distributed within and between generations. This article addresses two conceptual issues that underpin the relationship between climate change and the part of distributive justice concerned with the entitlements of future persons. The first is the role of reciprocity, conceived either as mutual advantage or fair play, in the allocation of distributive entitlements between generations. The second is the extent to which theories of 'justice as reciprocity' can ground duties of intergenerational justice that underpin radical policies to manage the causes and impacts of global climate change. I argue that theories of justice as fair reciprocity generate significant duties of environmental conservation, despite these duties not being owed directly to the not-yet-born.     

Intergenerational Justice and Climate Change

Global climate change has important implications for the way in which benefits and burdens will be distributed amongst present and future generations. As a result it raises important questions of intergenerational justice. It is shown that there is at least one serious problem for those who wish to approach these questions by utilizing familiar principles of justice. This is that such theories often pre-suppose harm-based accounts of injustice which are incompatible with the fact that the very social policies which climatologists and scientists claim will reduce the risks of climate change will also predictably, if indirectly, determine which individuals will live in the future. One proposed solution to this problem is outlined grounded in terms of the notion of collective interests.     

全球气候变化背景下我国法律应对问题的思考

自1990年成立"国家气候变化协调小组"到2015年《应对气候变化法(初稿)》面向各方组织研讨,我国在全球气候变化背景下通过采取法律活动积极推进应对气候变化的相关工作。本文将从我国应对气候变化法律活动发展进程的角度出发,总结不同阶段法律应对的经验,参考同一时期其他国家在气候变化法律应对上的措施和困难,对应我国目前的气候变化应对法律问题的不足,从而为我国应对气候变化法律体系的完善和健全提供参考。     

Global Justice and the Distribution of Natural Resources

What should a political theorist say about the justice of the global distribution of natural resources? One issue is whether principles of distributive justice should be applied globally, and this has been debated between nationalists and cosmopolitans. A second, though, is how the category of 'natural resources' should be conceived in relation to other distributable goods. This has not adequately been addressed even by theorists of global justice who expressly focus on natural resources. In particular, neither Charles Beitz's argument for a natural resources redistribution principle nor David Miller's argument against works with a satisfactory account of how the physical distribution of resources relates to the distribution of their economic value. A more satisfactory account can be developed from the perspective of ecological economics as inspired by Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen. From this perspective, global inequalities in the command of natural resources can be viewed with the clarity that a normative theory of their justice requires. If natural resources are re-conceptualised in terms of 'ecological space', Beitz's argument can be recast and vindicated. The re-conceptualisation is necessary to overcome the problems with the original version, as is shown by reference to the existing alternative formulations of Hillel Steiner and Thomas Pogge.     

Climate Change and Marx in the Twenty-First Century,Part II

This paper comes in two parts. Part I, published in the June 2018 issue of this journal, opened with an examination of the relationship between Marx’s characterization of the centrality of commodity production to capitalism as a system, its destructive results on Nature and the global scale of the climate crisis confronting the 21st century. Following a discussion of these issues, Part I moved on to critically examine three models of political economy: Hayekism, Keynesianism and State Socialism. Part II takes the argument further by critically examining a fourth model, Green Keynesianism, currently being manufactured in response to the crisis of climate change, in order to show the inability of all four models to resolve the existential threat posed to humanity in the 21st century and beyond. I then proceed to posit, as a thought experiment, a now-necessary fifth model of political economy, Green Socialism, along with the building blocks important to its evolution as a coherent system. The paper concludes with a brief mention of both the ends and means that demand serious consideration if Green Socialism is to be realized.     

国际气候问题及我国应对之策

2010年底在墨西哥坎昆召开的联合国气候大会,标志着冷战结束以来以国际气候变化为代表的全球环境问题,已经成为影响当前国际安全和国际关系的重大问题。该问题对包括我国在内的广大发展中国家的国家利益和国家安全都有很深的影响。国际气候变化问题的实质是西方利用其话语霸权之优势,阻遏非西方世界过快赶超而精心设计的战略陷阱和圈套,是国际政治斗争与国家利益较量的新型表现形式,其核心是所谓的"气候政治学"。对此,我国应有充分的认识,并积极应对。     

Assessing Climate Change: International Co-operation and Predictions of Environmental Change

Past scientific assessments of global climate change impacts have tended to give us information on global impacts. But scientists have been refining their predictions down to regional, national and local levels. Improved understanding of climate change impacts, and particularly more specific information on which countries are most vulnerable, will affect international co-operation. Presumably, countries that are most vulnerable to climate change will be more likely to join international efforts to address climate change. At least that is what one could logically hypothesise. Questions addressed include: Does 'vulnerability' to climate change matter for international co-operation? What might be the political impact of improved understanding of the effects of climate change on international environmental co-operation?     

Climate Change and Marx in the 21st Century,Part I

This paper comes in two parts. Part I begins with an examination of the relationship between Marx’s characterization of the centrality of commodity production to capitalism as a system, its destructive results on Nature, and the global scale of the climate crisis confronting the 21st century. It then moves on to critically examine three models of political economy (Hayekism, Keynesianism and State Socialism). Part II takes the argument forward by critically examining a fourth model, Green Keynesianism, currently being manufactured in response to the crisis of climate change, in order to show the inability of all four models to resolve the existential threat posed to humanity in the 21st century and beyond. We then proceed to posit, as a thought experiment, a fifth model of political economy, Green Socialism, as something now needed in the 21st century and discuss the important building blocks of the future evolution of a coherent system. The paper concludes with a brief mention of both the ends and means that need deliberation if Green Socialism is to be realized.