Climate ethics and population policy: A review of recent philosophical work

Abstract

It is well‐established that human population growth is a leading cause of increased greenhouse gas emissions and accelerating global climate change. After decades of neglect, philosophical ethicists have, over the past decade, taken up the issue of climate change and population policy and there are now numerous articles and books which explore the subject. Both rights‐based and consequentialist approaches seek to balance reproductive rights against other human rights and interests threatened by overpopulation and ecological degradation. While biocentric ethicists have additional reasons to advocate for smaller human populations, even anthropocentrists affirm the need to balance reproductive rights against reproductive responsibilities in order to promote the well‐being of future generations. There is a particularly strong consensus on the value of choice‐enhancing population policies that reduce fertility voluntarily, such as securing universal access to modern contraception and promoting equal rights and opportunities for women. There is strong support for government policies that incentivize smaller families, some support for policies that disincentivize larger ones, and little to no support for punitive policies. Many ethicists warn that failure to enact reasonable population policies now may necessitate harsher policies in the future, a common theme in climate ethics generally. This article is categorized under: Climate, Nature, and Ethics > Ethics and Climate Change

An Analysis of Three Decades of Increasing Carbon Emissions: The Weight of the P Factor

“…This is also confirmed by IPCC Assessment Reports, which have repeatedly identified both population growth and economic growth as the main drivers of climate change [2]. With the global population recently reaching 8 billion and projected to grow for the rest of the century (median projection in [8]), the question of whether such unprecedented numbers are sustainable has re-emerged in the scientific literature [9][10][11].…”

Safeguarding marine life: conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems

“…Three important considerations affected what was considered within the scope of our methodological approach. 1) We note that up to and beyond 2030, the driver with the greatest impact on global marine ecosystems and biodiversity is anthropogenic climate change (Cafaro 2021 ; IPCC 2019 ; Trisos et al 2020 ). Consequently, cutting greenhouse gas emissions is the action with the greatest potential benefit to the state of global marine ecosystems in the long term.…”

“…This approach is upheld in United Nations processes including the Aichi Targets of the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the 2030 Agenda and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). While MPAs are, and will continue to be, a fundamental and effective conservation tool when properly implemented and managed (see Edgar et al 2014 ; Gownaris et al 2019 ), human population growth, and activities contributing to unsustainable lifestyles, continue to threaten marine ecosystems beyond the boundaries of MPAs (Cafaro 2021 ; Halpern et al 2019 ). Safeguarding marine biodiversity and ecosystems into the future will therefore require more holistic and inclusive approaches.…”

Towards A Multispecies Population Ethics

“…Yet the focus of population ethics, i.e., ethical research on moral issues regarding variable populations, has mostly remained anthropocentric. Ethical discussions that are more applied in nature mostly have sought to justify policies to reduce human population growth (Cafaro 2012(Cafaro , 2021Cripps 2016aCripps , 2016b. The more theoretically oriented population ethics aims to find an appropriate value theory of human populations that would avoid the infamous problems formulated by Derek Parfit in his seminal book Reasons and Persons (1984) (Arrhenius 2000, Arrhenius, Ryberg, andTännsjö 2017).…”