Global negotiations on climate finance: what role can fairness play?
Pickering, Jonathan ;  Freie Universität Berlin, Fachbereich Politik- und Sozialwissenschaften, Forschungsstelle für Umweltpolitik

Main titleGlobal negotiations on climate finance: what role can fairness play?
Title variationsConstructing a fair approach to global climate finance : how should we take account of divergent perceptions of fairness in negotiations?
AuthorPickering, Jonathan
InstitutionFreie Universität Berlin, Fachbereich Politik- und Sozialwissenschaften, Forschungsstelle für Umweltpolitik
No. of Pages23 S.
KeywordsClimate finance ;
Classification (DDC)320 Political science
AbstractThe 2009 Copenhagen Climate Conference highlighted the continuing challenge of reconciling developed and developing countries’ divergent perceptions about what a fair global climate agreement could look like. A major task for the field of climate ethics is to present a vision of fairness in climate policy that not only has ethical integrity but is practically feasible. However, to date the field has largely not engaged substantively with perceptions of fairness held by participants and stakeholders in climate negotiations. Some theorists have voiced legitimate concerns that relying unduly on stakeholder perceptions may result in theories of fairness whose horizons are limited by political compromise. I will argue that if we are concerned about theory-building as a means of advancing fairness in climate policy, we must take seriously (if not uncritically accept) existing perceptions of fairness. Empirical analysis of those perceptions may play an important role in clarifying the values at stake for different parties and identifying politically feasible steps towards a more thoroughly fair climate regime.

I will illustrate the value of this approach with reference to two principles for determining countries’ liability to contribute to international climate finance. First, I argue that divergent views about the role of historical responsibility (ranging between liability for all historical emissions and only prospective liability) could be reconciled in a principled way by limiting liability to emissions that foreseeably and avoidably contribute to climate change. Second, while the current listing of ‘developed’ (Annex I) and ‘developing’ (non-Annex 1) countries does not distinguish categories of liability in a way that is sufficiently meaningful in ethical terms, theorists need to take seriously the concerns of developing countries about abandoning such a distinction altogether. A fair and politically feasible division could be reached through incremental steps towards more nuanced and objectively based differentiation of capability and responsibility.
If your browser can't open the file, please download the file first and then open it
FU DepartmentProceedings of the Berlin Conferences on   Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change
Year of publication2010
Type of documentConferencepresentation
Terms of use/Rights Nutzungsbedingungen
Authors commentsD5: Financing Adaptation
Created at2010-11-11 : 04:07:31
Last changed2015-02-27 : 08:25:47
Static URLhttp://edocs.fu-berlin.de/docs/receive/FUDOCS_document_000000007044