Procreation, Carbon Tax, and Poverty

Eggleston, Ben

doi:10.4324/9781315205069-4

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given such ideal policy, carbon taxes can be defended using different moral frameworks. Standardly, they are defended on utilitarian or consequentialist grounds (Broome, 2012; Budolfson, 2021; Eggleston, 2020). Utilitarianism holds that actions are right only if, and to the extent that, they produce the outcomes with the greatest total welfare amongst available actions.…”

Section: Features Of Ideal Carbon Tax Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This will lead to optimal choices. On the revenue side, with an ideal global carbon taxing policy, resources would be diverted to globally poorer countries, increasing global distributive equality (Eggleston, 2020), or supporting access to energy for the poor (Gajevic Sayegh, 2019).…”

Section: Features Of Ideal Carbon Tax Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, carbon tax revenue can be used to compensate those harmed by climate change, whether nationally or internationally (Eggleston, 2020). This is less often considered by political actors, since most of the effects of climate change are international and carbon tax revenues being used internationally is difficult to defend politically.…”

Section: Moral Choices In Nonideal Carbon Tax Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Carbon tax ethics

Mintz‐Woo

2023

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ideal carbon tax policy is internationally coordinated, fully internalizes externalities, redistributes revenues to those harmed, and is politically acceptable, generating predictable market signals. Since nonideal circumstances rarely allow all these conditions to be met, moral issues arise. This paper surveys some of the work in moral philosophy responding to several of these issues. First, it discusses the moral drivers for estimates of the social cost of carbon. Second, it explains how national self‐interest can block climate action and suggests international policies—carbon border tax adjustments and carbon clubs—that can help address these concerns. Third, it introduces some of the social science literature about the political acceptability of carbon taxes before addressing a couple common public concerns about carbon taxes. Finally, it introduces four carbon revenue usage options, arguing that redistributive and climate compensation measures are most morally justified.This article is categorized under: Climate, Nature, and Ethics > Ethics and Climate Change Climate, Nature, and Ethics > Climate Change and Global Justice Climate and Development > Social Justice and the Politics of Development

show abstract

Section: Features Of Ideal Carbon Tax Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Features Of Ideal Carbon Tax Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Moral Choices In Nonideal Carbon Tax Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Carbon tax ethics

Mintz‐Woo

2023

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Carbon Pricing is not Unjust

Mintz‐Woo

2023

Global Challenges

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this perspective is to argue that carbon pricing is not unjust. Two important dimensions of justice are distributive and procedural (sometimes called “participatory”) justice. In terms of distributive justice, it is argued that carbon pricing can be made distributionally just through revenue recycling and that it should be expected that even neutral reductions in emissions will generate progressive benefits, both internationally and regionally. In terms of procedural justice, it is argued that carbon pricing is in principle compatible with any procedure; however, there is also a particular morally justifiable procedure, the Citizens’ Assembly, which has been implemented in Ireland on this precise question and has generated broad agreement on carbon pricing. It is suggested that this morally matters because such groups are like “ideal advisors” that offer morally important advice. Finally, an independent objection is offered to some ambitious alternatives to carbon pricing like Green New Deal‐type frameworks, frameworks that aim to simultaneously tackle multiple social challenges. The objection is that these will take too long to work in a climate context, both to develop and to iterate.

show abstract

Carbon pricing ethics

Mintz‐Woo

2021

Philosophy Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The three main types of policies for addressing climate change are command and control regulation, carbon taxes (or price instruments), and cap and trade (or quantity instruments). The first question in the ethics of carbon pricing is whether the latter two (price and quantity instruments) are preferable to command and control regulation. The second question is, if so, how should we evaluate the relative merits of price and quantity instruments. I canvass relevant arguments to explain different ways of addressing these important policy questions, suggesting that carbon pricing is preferable to command and control regulation, and that price instruments have the theoretical edge over quantity instruments.

show abstract

Procreation, Carbon Tax, and Poverty

Cited by 3 publications

References 1 publication

Carbon tax ethics

Carbon tax ethics

Carbon Pricing is not Unjust

Carbon pricing ethics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About