Assessing climate policies: catastrophe avoidance and the right to sustainable development

  • With the significant disconnect between the collective aim of limiting warming to well below 2°C and the current means proposed to achieve such an aim, the goal of this paper is to offer a moral assessment of prominent alternatives to current international climate policy. To do so, we’ll outline five different policy routes that could potentially bring the means and goal in line. Those five policy routes are: (1) exceed 2°C; (2) limit warming to less than 2°C by economic de-growth; (3) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation only; (4) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation and widespread deployment of Negative Emissions Technologies (NETs); and (5) limit warming to less than 2°C by traditional mitigation, NETs, and Solar Radiation Management as a fallback. In assessing these five policy routes, we rely primarily upon two moral considerations: the avoidance of catastrophic climate change and the right to sustainable development. We’ll conclude that we should continue to aim at the two-degree target, and that to get there we should use aggressive mitigation, pursue the deployment of NETs, and continue to research SRM.

Download full text files

Export metadata

Author:Daniel Callies, Darrel MoellendorfORCiDGND
Parent Title (English):Politics, philosophy & economics
Place of publication:Thousand Oaks, Calif. [u.a.]
Document Type:Article
Date of Publication (online):2021/05/05
Date of first Publication:2021/05/05
Publishing Institution:Universitätsbibliothek Johann Christian Senckenberg
Release Date:2021/09/28
Tag:climate change; degrowth; geoengineering; mitigation; negative emissions; sustainable development
Page Number:24
First Page:127
Last Page:150
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: We thank the DFG-funded Excellence Cluster “Normative Orders” for financial support during the writing of this paper.
Dieser Beitrag ist mit Zustimmung des Rechteinhabers aufgrund einer (DFG-geförderten) Allianz- bzw. Nationallizenz frei zugänglich.
This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively.
Dewey Decimal Classification:1 Philosophie und Psychologie / 10 Philosophie / 100 Philosophie und Psychologie
3 Sozialwissenschaften / 32 Politikwissenschaft / 320 Politikwissenschaft
Licence (German):License LogoDeutsches Urheberrecht