Common Wealth Dividends, Generalized

Ranalli, Brent

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-72416-0_5

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From a philosophical standpoint, universal dividends embody the ethical principle that all people own the gifts of Nature—in this case, the right to share in the revenue from use of the limited carbon absorptive capacity of the biosphere—in equal and common measure. [ 59,61–63 ] From a political standpoint, universality helps safeguard the durability of the policy of keeping fossil fuels in the ground throughout the decades needed to complete the clean energy transition, much as universality has protected social security and national health systems.…”

Section: Principle #3: Protect Household Incomes: Climate Dividends F...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Justice and Carbon Pricing: Can They Be Reconciled?

Boyce

Ash

Ranalli³

2023

Global Challenges

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

202200204clean energy). As may be expected, powerful opposition to carbon pricing has come from the fossil fuel lobby, which has sought to block legislation or, failing that, to weaken it. [1,2] More surprisingly, perhaps, opposition also has come from environmental justice (EJ) advocates. The central goal in EJ is to combat disproportionate environmental harms imposed upon people of color and low-income communities. Many EJ advocates fear that carbon pricing could exacerbate pollution exposure disparities. This paper focuses on the objections to carbon pricing raised by EJ advocates.In brief, critics have argued that carbon pricing (i) fails to reduce carbon emissions significantly, (ii) fails to reduce the disproportionate impacts of hazardous co-pollutants on people of color and low-income communities, (iii) harms the purchasing power of low-income households, and (iv) commodifies nature. [3,4] Proponents of carbon pricing often, and in our view hastily, have dismissed these criticisms as baseless.Here, we chart a middle path between dismissal of carbon pricing and dismissal of its critics. The foundation for our position is a basic ethical principle: we believe that the gifts of Nature should be shared in equal measure by all. These gifts include the right to a clean and safe environment-a right recognized in many national constitutions, the most fundamental of legal documents, worldwide [5] -and the right to share in revenue that is generated by limiting the use of scarce resources. From this perspective, we have a moral imperative both to eliminate the disparate pollution burdens that poison the air and water of overburdened communities and to halt destabilization of the Earth's climate to protect future generations as well as vulnerable present-day populations.Halting the disparate pollution imposed on EJ communities requires, first and foremost, that we take seriously the extent of the problem and recognize the complicity of government policies together with market forces in creating and perpetuating environmental injustice. Solutions require rectifying systemic failures of both the market and the state. EJ and climate stabilization are complementary goals-indeed, climate change itself exacerbates environmental injustice-but we argue here that advancing both goals together requires that explicit EJ provisions be built into the design of climate policy. At a bare minimum, climate policy should guarantee that existing pollution disparities are not exacerbated. Going further, welldesigned design policies can advance the more ambitious goal of reducing environmental disparities.Halting climate destabilization requires, above all, that we keep fossil fuels in the ground. Carbon dioxide emissions from Carbon pricing has been criticized by environmental justice advocates on the grounds that it fails to reduce emissions significantly, fails to reduce the disproportionate impacts of hazardous co-pollutants on people of color and low-income communities, hits low-income households harder than wealthier households, a...

show abstract

Section: Principle #3: Protect Household Incomes: Climate Dividends F...mentioning

confidence: 99%