What does justice require with regard to the distribution of
responsibilities for tackling climate change?
I.
Introduction
Climate change is a serious issue that negatively affects human life and
interests, as well as the biodiversity of the planet; that is why, measures in order
to tackle climate change are essential in maintaining a clean world for the
present generations, as well as the future generations to come. It is clear by now
among scholars and people alike that climate change is mostly caused by human
activity, that is why actions such as mitigation and adaptation are needed in
order to prevent or slow the process of climate change; and to adapt to climate
change that is already unavoidable. Mitigation is usually put first, because
adaptation will be more needed in the future, depending on the results of the
current mitigation actions. Mitigation consists of actions such as reducing
global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and enhancing GHG sinks. (Blomfield,
2012, p.283). However, the climate change issue poses some difficult ethical
questions regarding the distribution of responsibilities for tackling climate
change. Who should have more responsibility, the ones who cause climate
change, or the ones who are more able to deal with this burden?
In this essay, I will discuss about the two major principles that have been argued
by scholars such as Caney and Singer, ‘the polluter pays’ principle and the