Carbon Trading: Unethical, Unjust and Ineffective?

| August 8, 2016 | Leave a Comment

CO2 emissions by Ian Britton | Flickr | CC BY-NC 2.0

Item Link: Access the Resource

File: Download

Media Type: Article - Recent

Date of Publication: October 2011

Year of Publication: 2011

Publication City: Cambridge, UK

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Author(s): Simon Caney, Cameron Hepburn

Journal: Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement

Volume: 69

Pages: 201-234

Categories: , ,

In their article Carbon Trading: Unethical, Unjust and Ineffective? from 2011, Simon Caney and Cameron Hepburn critically examined some of the most commonly raised objections to cap-and-trade systems through the lens of moral philosophy and economics.

ABSTRACT: Cap-and-trade systems for greenhouse gas emissions are an important part of the climate change policies of the EU, Japan, New Zealand, among others, as well as China (soon) and Australia (potentially). However, concerns have been raised on a variety of ethical grounds about the use of markets to reduce emissions. For example, some people worry that emissions trading allows the wealthy to evade their responsibilities. Others are concerned that it puts a price on the natural environment. Concerns have also been raised about the distributional justice of emissions trading. Finally, some commentators have questioned the actual effectiveness of emissions trading in reducing emissions. This paper considers these three categories of objections – ethics, justice and effectiveness – through the lens of moral philosophy and economics. It is concluded that only the objections based on distributional justice can be sustained. This points to reform of the carbon market system, rather than its elimination.

Email this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on LinkedIn
The views and opinions expressed through the MAHB Website are those of the contributing authors and do not necessarily reflect an official position of the MAHB. The MAHB aims to share a range of perspectives and welcomes the discussions that they prompt.