Mintz-Woo Kian
Department of Philosophy & Environmental Research Institute University College Cork Cork T12 Y1F1 Ireland.
Equity and Justice Group International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Laxenburg A-2361 Austria.
Glob Chall. 2023 Dec 10;8(1):2300089. doi: 10.1002/gch2.202300089. eCollection 2024 Jan.
The aim of this perspective is to argue that carbon pricing is not unjust. Two important dimensions of justice are distributive and procedural (sometimes called "participatory") justice. In terms of distributive justice, it is argued that carbon pricing can be made distributionally just through revenue recycling and that it should be expected that even neutral reductions in emissions will generate progressive benefits, both internationally and regionally. In terms of procedural justice, it is argued that carbon pricing is in principle compatible with any procedure; however, there is also a particular morally justifiable procedure, the Citizens' Assembly, which has been implemented in Ireland on this precise question and has generated broad agreement on carbon pricing. It is suggested that this morally matters because such groups are like "ideal advisors" that offer morally important advice. Finally, an independent objection is offered to some ambitious alternatives to carbon pricing like Green New Deal-type frameworks, frameworks that aim to simultaneously tackle multiple social challenges. The objection is that these will take too long to work in a climate context, both to develop and to iterate.
本文观点旨在论证碳定价并非不公正。正义有两个重要维度,即分配正义和程序正义(有时也称为“参与性正义”)。就分配正义而言,有人认为碳定价可通过收入循环实现分配公平,而且可以预期,即使是中性的减排措施,在国际和地区层面都将产生渐进式效益。就程序正义而言,有人认为碳定价原则上与任何程序都兼容;然而,还有一种特别符合道德的程序,即公民大会,爱尔兰已就这一确切问题实施了该程序,并就碳定价达成了广泛共识。有人认为这在道德层面很重要,因为这类群体就像“理想顾问”,能提供具有道德重要性的建议。最后,针对碳定价的一些雄心勃勃的替代方案,如绿色新政式框架(旨在同时应对多重社会挑战的框架),提出了一个独立的反对意见。反对意见是,在气候背景下,这些方案无论是制定还是迭代,都需要太长时间才能发挥作用。