What’s fair?
Equity and Global Climate
Change Conference
April 17, 2001
Nancy Kete
World Resources Institute
WRI
Here’s one view
“The United States Senate would not ratify any
protocol, any treaty that did not …include all
nations of the world under the same kind of
mandatory, legally binding conditions as Europe
or the United States.”
– U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel, “Big Shot” interview on
Tech Central Station 11/13/00
WRI
Here’s another
“The right to emit carbon dioxide is a human right
that should be allocated on an equal basis to all
of humankind.”
Aubrey Meyer,
Contraction and Convergence: The global solution to climate change
WRI
And a third
“It is obvious that in the future the world will have
to accept some common maximum per capita
emission for each country in order to deal with
global warming.”
Anil Agarwal and Sunita Narain, in The atmospheric
rights of all people on earth, CSE website
www.oneworld.org
WRI
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that
is simple, neat, and wrong.”
H.L. Mencken
WRI
Beware of moral certitude
These claims all have a ring of moral
certitude that doesn’t withstand scrutiny.
WRI
Beware of moral certitude
• The Byrd-Hagel resolution seems mainly
aimed at ensuring no progress -- it’s a
smokescreen.
• The per capita rights talk seems mainly
aimed at redistributing global wealth and is
fraught with ethical and practical
difficulties.
• Both are inconsistent with FCCC provisions
on equity.
WRI
What is fair?
• Solutions that are consistent with FCCC
provisions -- complex, multi-faceted, qualitative.
• Beyond this, it is not at all obvious what
constitutes a fair response to climate change
WRI
The climate convention on equity
• 3.1. equity, common but differentiated responsibilities, North
takes the lead.
• 3.2. & 3.4 consider specific needs, circumstances, conditions
of all Parties, especially developing countries
• 3.3. policies and measures should “ensure global benefits at
the lowest possible costs”
• 4.7. developing country commitments are conditional upon
successful developed country implementation of commitments
related to financial resources and technology transfer
WRI
Formulas won’t work
Emissions
Population
Wealth
Etc.
= Equity?
“Equity as a legal concept is a direct emanation of
the idea of justice.” (International Court of Justice, 1982, case
concerning the continental shelf )
Equitable cannot be reduced to egalitarian.
WRI
The moral ambiguities of fairness
• Many theories of what is just, fair, or equitable
–
–
–
–
Utilitarianism: nations equally “share burdens”
Maximin: give entitlements to the poor countries
Entitlement theories: build on the status quo
Egalitarianism: equal share to nations or persons
• Which theory of justice one adopts or applies
depends on:
– what information one has
– and one’s own circumstances
• Most theories of fairness apply to individuals, not
countries
WRI
Scrap the rights talk
• Talk of rights and entitlements focuses unduly on:
– Allocating atmospheric rights (dividing the pie)
– Trading of atmospheric rights
• Emission rights will be balanced by demanding
obligations:
–
–
–
–
binding targets and non-compliance consequences
sound measurement and reporting
third party verification systems
transparent registries and accounting systems
• For many countries, these are excessively hard
WRI
The atmosphere is not divisible
• No one can, or does, own the atmosphere
• Atmospheric use rights are or ought to be:
– collectively managed by the COP for the purposes of
meeting UNFCCC’s safe climate objective
– time-bound and subject to review and revision
– conditional (upon undertaking specific obligations)
• Lessons from the U.S. Clean Air Act Amendments:
an allowance is defined as limited authorization to
emit SO2 in accordance with provisions of the law.
Allowances are not property rights.
WRI
Avoid one-size-fits-all ideas
• The treaty will need:
– different levels of participation for different
countries
– mechanisms and policy tools that can enable
more equitable outcomes (e.g., carbon
intensity)
WRI
Carbon Intensity
• Not a global planning principle; not a
convergence criterion; doesn’t deliver equity
• It is a way to think about how countries can
reduce emissions
WRI
Carbon Intensity
• For developing countries, it could provide a way
to make new, formal commitments, while
avoiding environmental and economic risks
associated with emissions caps.
• Carbon intensity can also be an indicator of
progress for countries not ready to commit.
WRI
Carbon intensity focuses on
energy and fuels
Well known identity:
CO2 Emissions = GDP X Population X Energy
per person
GDP
“Activity” levels
(GDP p/c and Population)
X
CO2
Energy
Energy Intensity Fuel Mix
of Economy
WRI
Carbon intensity focuses on
energy and fuels
Carbon intensity:
measures mainly
energy intensity
and the fuel mix,
not economic
activity
CO2 =
GDP
Energy
GDP
X
CO2
Energy
Energy Intensity Fuel Mix
of Economy
WRI
Carbon Intensity
• Can broaden participation without insisting
all countries take binding emissions caps
• It avoids the categorical error that the
atmosphere can be divided among all living
persons
WRI