Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Domänen der Klimaethik, ein neuer Blick – Domains of Climate Ethics Revisited

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Ethik in den Ingenieurwissenschaften

  • 3148 Accesses

Abstract

Climate ethics (CE) has become an emerging field in applied ethics. CE is not just a sub-discipline of environmental ethics but has its own moral and ethical profile. Meanwhile, CE is not just about mitigation and future generations but has enlarged onto adaptation, climate engineering, allocation of burdens, and distributive justice. This article summarizes recent developments in CE and proposes a coherent set of yardsticks for orientation within the different domains of CE.

Zusammenfassung

Die Klimaethik ist zu einem wichtigen Gebiet innerhalb der angewandten Ethik geworden. Sie ist nicht nur ein Unterthema der Umweltethik, sondern hat ihr eigenes moralisches und ethisches Profil. Mittlerweile behandelt die Klimaethik nicht mehr nur die CO2-Mitigation und Belange künftiger Generationen, sondern hat sich auf die Themen Anpassungsfinanzierung, Climate Engineering, Lastenaufteilung und Verteilungsgerechtigkeit ausgeweitet. Diese Artikel fast die jüngsten Entwicklungen auf dem Gebiet der Klimaethik zusammen und unterbreitet kohärente Maßstäbe zur Orientierung innerhalb der verschiedenen Domänen der Klimaethik.

This article is an updated version of Ott (2012a). The basic structure has been maintained. Recent debates and new data have been incorporated. Thanks to Christian Baatz, Margarita Berg, Michel Bourban, Frederike Neuber and Patrick Hohlwegler.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 19.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 24.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Authors who have contributed to the emergence of CE are, among others, Henry Shue, John Broome, Steve Gardiner, Aubrey Meyer, Donald Brown, Edward Page, Michael Northcott, Simon Caney, Marco Grasso, Christoph Lumer, and Christian Baatz. Essential articles are collected in Gardiner et al. (2010).

  2. 2.

    The idea to distinguish different domains is taken from Grasso (2007).

  3. 3.

    GHG concentrations can be defined in terms of CO2 only or in terms of all GHG which are calculated in CO2-equivalents (CO2-eq). In the following, I adopt the CO2-equivalents numbers.

  4. 4.

    Ocean as carbon sinks, albedo change, cloud cover, precipitation patterns, thermohaline circulation, stability of cryosphere, ‘tipping points’ etc.

  5. 5.

    Mass extinction of species is not exclusively triggered by climate change, but also by agriculture, deforestation, loss of habitat, neobiota, and hunting.

  6. 6.

    Ott (2004), the famous future-individual paradox was outlined in Parfit (1983). Parfit himself downplayed the role of the paradox for long-term policymaking.

  7. 7.

    See Schröder et al. (2002), 417 with further references.

  8. 8.

    Nordhaus (1994). Lomborg uncritically relied on Nordhaus’ calculations in his “Skeptical Environmentalist” (2001).

  9. 9.

    Gernot Klepper, Ulrich Hampicke, Peter Michaelis, Ottmar Edenhofer, Martin Quaas, to name but a few German economists.

  10. 10.

    Cf. the contributions in Hampicke and Ott (2003).

  11. 11.

    The problems of EA increase if not only mitigation but adaptation and climate-engineering are addressed, too. If EA can’t calculate the efficient solution for mitigation policies only it can’t calculate a fortiori the efficient solution in the triangular affair in between mitigation, adaptation, and modes of climate-engineering. To determine the ‘efficient’ solution of mitigation, adaptation, and climate-engineering in a global welfare function over a century is, at best, an utopian ideal and, at worst, a misleading, dangerous, and chimerical myth.

  12. 12.

    At least with respect to environmental problems SPA has several advantages over EA since it is hard to see how the ‘efficient’ pollution of air, rivers, and marine systems or the ‘efficient’ number of species on planet Earth might be calculated.

  13. 13.

    This objective has three normative constraints which I must leave aside here.

  14. 14.

    If one takes a closer look on the recent literature from religion-based ethics this convergence broadens.

  15. 15.

    Climate sensitivity is defined as increase in GMT at a CO2-level of 560 ppmv (twice than preindustrial CO2)

  16. 16.

    Betz (2009) claims that the IPCC methodology of modal verificationism by which climate sensitivity is determined should be replaced by modal falsificationism. If so, there will be more reasons for concern and precaution.

  17. 17.

    Grandfathering, basic needs, Rawlsian difference principles, proportionality, per-capita schemes.

  18. 18.

    I changed my mind on this ontological-economic concept several times. Meanwhile, this assumption seems not as flawed as Baatz and Ott (2017a, b) argued. This assumption needs more refinement.

  19. 19.

    This approach should be based on a benchmark to avoid incentives for pro-natalistic population policies. It is highly doubtful whether restrictive population policies, as in China, can be regarded as ‘early action’ in mitigation policies.

  20. 20.

    How deep are Arab countries indebted to Sub-Saharan Africa since there was slave trade over centuries before the Europeans took part in slave trade?

  21. 21.

    Arguments in favor of the beneficiary account are given by Gosseries (2004) and Caney (2006).

  22. 22.

    My parents were ignorant about climate change and simply enjoyed cars and family holidays in the prosperous Western Germany between 1965 and 1990.

  23. 23.

    The concept of adaptation must be secured against biological definitions of adaptation of organisms to a hostile environment. If not, adaptation to climate change might be seen as an instance of survival of the fittest.

  24. 24.

    A conceptual framework on adaptation strategies is given by Smit et al. (2000).

  25. 25.

    Germany has already adopted a national adaptation plan.

  26. 26.

    It should be asked whether such assistance should be additional to ordinary development aid (ODA) as most NGO’s suppose. This problem is not addressed here since such debate relies on assumption of how good or bad the 100 billion $ ODA are spent each year. It remains doubtful whether strict emission reduction (80–90% compared to a 1990 benchmark), doubling of ODA (0.7% GDP), and additional burdens for adaptation funding gradually become somewhat over-demanding even to rich societies that have to deal with many other problems than just climate change.

  27. 27.

    See Seitz (2018) and Menzel (1992) for critical overviews.

  28. 28.

    This 100-billion-$-number does not entail costs for provision and resettlement of displaced persons which is a hard special case of adaptation. The case for climate-induced displaced persons is beyond the scope of this article (see Ott and Riemann 2018).

  29. 29.

    Distributing migrants onto EU-countries seems a fair analogy.

  30. 30.

    Sometimes it is added that the problem of global cooperation in mitigation of GHG can be easily turned into a technological joint effort problem.

  31. 31.

    Baer et al. (2008). See also the homepage of www.ecoequity.org.

  32. 32.

    The charming idea that rich persons in poor countries should contribute to mitigation and adaptation efforts is not at the heart of the GDR-concept.

References

  • Allen, M. (2003) Liability for climate change. Nature 421, 891–892.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, K., Peters, G. (2016). The trouble with negative emissions. Science (New York, N.Y.). 354(6309). 182–183. https://doi.org/f3t4n9

  • Arrhenius, S. (1896) On the Influence of Carbon Acid in the Air upon the Temperature on the Ground. Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, Vol. 41, April 1896, 237–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baatz, C. (2013) Responsibility for the Past? Ethics, Politics & Environment, 16(1), 94–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baatz, Christian (2018) Climate Adaptation Finance and Justice. A Criteria-Based Assessment of Policy Instruments. Analyse & Kritik, Vol. 40(1), 1–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baatz, C., Ott, K. (2017a) Why Aggressive Mitigation Must Be Part Of Any Pathway To Climate Justice. In: Preston, Christopher (Ed.) Climate Justice and Geoengineering. London, pp. 93–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baatz, C., Ott, K. (2017b) In Defense of Emissions Egalitarianism? In: Meyer, L., Sanklecha, P. (Eds.) Climate Justice and Historical Emissions. Cambridge University Press, pp. 165–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baer, P., Athanasiou, T., Kartha, S., Kemp-Benedict, E. (2008) The Greenhouse Development Rights Framework, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Betz, G. (2009) What range of future scenarios should climate policy be based on? Modal falsificationism and its limitations. Philosophia Naturalis, Vol. 46 (1), 133–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betz, G. & Cacean, S. (2012) Ethical Aspects of Climate Engineering. Karlsruhe: KIT Scientific Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broome, J. (1992) Counting the Cost of Global Warming, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caney, S. (2006) Environmental Degradation, Reparations, and the Moral Significance of History. Journal of Social Philosophy, 37 (3), 464–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caney, S. (2009) Justice and the distribution of greenhouse gas emissions. Journal of Global Ethics, Vol. 5 (2), 125–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crutzen, P. (2006) Albedo Enhancement by Stratospheric Sulfur Injections: A Contribution to Resolve a Policy Dilemma? Climatic Change, 77, 211–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner, S. (2010) Is ‘Arming the Future’ with Geoengineering Really the Lesser Evil? In Gardiner, S., Caney, S., Jamieson, D., & Shue, H. (Eds.) Climate Ethics: Essential Readings, Oxford, 284–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner, S. (2011) A Perfect Moral Storm. New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner, S. (2013) Geoengineering and Moral Schizophrenia: What Is the Question? In: Burns, W., Strauss, A. (Eds.) Climate Change Geoengineering: Legal, Political and Philosophical Perspectives. Cambridge, 11–38.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner, S., Caney, S., Jamieson, D., & Shue, H. (Eds.) (2010) Climate Ethics: Essential Readings, Oxford, 284–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasso, M. (2007) A normative ethical framework in climate change. Climatic Change, Vol. 81, 223–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hampicke, U. (2011) Climate Change Economics and Discounted Utilitarianism. Ecological Economics, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0921800911003612.

  • Hampicke, U., Ott, K. (Eds.) (2003) Special Issue: Reflections on Discounting. International Journal of Sustainable Development, Vol. 6 (1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton, J. (2015) The emergency framing of solar geoengineering: Time for a different approach. The Anthropocene Review, 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jänicke, M. (2010) Die Akzeleration von technischem Fortschritt in der Klimapolitik – Lehren aus Erfolgsfällen. Zeitschrift für Umweltpolitik, No. 4/2010, 367–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonas, H. (1979) Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Frankfurt/M.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keith, D. (2013) A Case for Climate Engineering. Boston: Boston Review Books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lomborg, B. (2001) Skeptical Environmentalist. Cambridge/Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lohmann, U., Gasparini, B. (2017) A cirrus cloud climate deal? Science, Vol. 357, 248–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumer, C. (2002) The Greenhouse. A welfare assessment and some morals, Lanham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mcnutt, M., Abdalati, W., Caldeira, K., Doney, S. et al. (2015a) Climate Intervention: Reflecting Sunlight to Cool Earth. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNutt, M., Abdalati, W., Caldeira, K., Doney, S. et al. (2015b) Climate Intervention: Carbon Dioxide Removal and Reliable Sequestration. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menzel, U. (1992) Das Ende der Dritten Welt und das Scheitern der großen Theorie. Frankfurt/M.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, A. (1999) The Kyoto Protocol and the Emergence of ‘Contraction and Convergence’. In: HOHMEYER, O., RENNINGS, K. (Eds.) Man-made climate change. Heidelberg, 291–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moellendorf, D. (2014) The Moral Challenge of Dangerous Climate Change. Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrow, D. (2014) Ethical aspects of the mitigation obstruction argument against climate engineering research. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 372: 20140062.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemeier, U., Schmidt, H., Timmreck, C. (2011) The dependency of geoengineered sulfate aerosol on the emission strategy. Atmospheric Science Letters, Vol. 12, 189–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemeier, U., Tilmes, S. (2017) Sulfur injections for a cooler planet. Science, Vol. 357, 246–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuber, Frederike (2018) Buying Time with Climate Engineering? Karlsruhe: Kit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuber, F., Ott, K. (2020): The Buying Time Argument within the Solar Radiation Management Discourse. Applied Sciences Vol. 10(4637), July 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordhaus, W. (1994) Managing the Global Commons: The Economics of Climate Change. Cambridge/Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ott, K. (2004) Essential Components of Future Ethics. In: DÖRING, R., RÜHS, M. (Eds.) Ökonomische Rationalität und praktische Vernunft. FS Hampicke. Würzburg, 83–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ott, K. (2010) Umweltethik zur Einführung. Hamburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ott, K. (2012a) Domains of Climate Ethics. Jahrbuch für Wissenschaft und Ethik, Vol. 16, 95–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ott, K. (2012b) Might Solar Radiation Management Constitute a Dilemma? In: PRESTON, C: (ed.) Engineering the Climate. Lanham, 33–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ott, K. (2018) The Political Economy of Solar Radiation Management. Frontiers in Env. Sc., Vol. 6, June 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ott, K., Neuber, F. (2020) Climate Engineering. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. Online Publication July 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228620.013.815

  • Ott, K., Döring, R. (2008) Theorie und Praxis starker Nachhaltigkeit. 2. erweiterte und aktualisierte Auflage, Marburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ott, K., Klepper, G., Lingner, S., Schäfer, A., Scheffran, J., Sprinz, D. (2004) Reasoning Goals of Climate Protection. Specification of Article 2 UNFCCC. Berlin: Umweltbundesamt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ott, K., Riemann, M (2018) On Flight Reasons – Persecution, Escape, Displacement. In: Besier, G., Stoklosa, K. (Eds.) How to deal with Refugees? Europe as a Continent of Dreams. Münster, 15–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parfit, D. (1983) Energy Policy and the Further Future. In: MACLEAN. D., BROWN, P. (Eds.) Energy and the Future. Totowa, 166–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parmesan, C., Yohe, G. (2003) A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems. Nature, 421, 37–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rickels, U. et al. (2011) Gezielte Eingriffe in das Klima? Eine Bestandsaufnahme der Debatte zu Climate Engineering. Sondierungsstudie für das BMBF. Kiel: Earth Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robock, A. (2008) 20 Reasons Why Geoengineering May be a Bad Idea. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 64, 14–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royal Society (2011) Solar radiation management: The Governance of research. Online: https://royalsociety.org/~/media/Royal_Society_Content/policy/projects/solar-radiation-governance/DES2391_SRMGI%20report_web.pdf

  • Schröder, M. et al. (2002) Klimavorhersage und Klimavorsorge. Berlin, Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seitz, Volker (2018) Afrika wird armregiert. München.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shue, H. (1992) The Unavoidability of Justice, in: HURREL, A., KINGSBURY, B. (Eds.) The International Politics of the Environment. Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sillmann, J., Lenton, T.M., Ott, K., et al. (2015) Climate emergencies do not justify engineering the climate. Nature Climate Change, 5, 290–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smit, B., Burton, J., Klein, R., Wandel, J. (2000) An Anatomy of Adaptation to Climatic Change and Variability. Climatic Change 45, 223–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SRU (Sachverständigenrat für Umweltfragen) (2019) Demokratisch regieren in ökologischen Grenzen. – Zur Legitimität von Umweltpolitik. Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steffen, W., Rockström, J. et al. (2018) Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene. PNAS, 115, 8252–8259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, N. et al. (2007) The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teller, E. et al. (2002) Active Climate Stabilization: Practical Physics-Based Approaches to Prevention of Climate Change, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tol, R. (2008) Why Worry About Climate Change? A Research Agenda. Environmental Values 17 (4), 437–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trentmann, Frank (2016) Empire of Things. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNFCCC 2016. Unites Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Conference of the Parties, Twenty-first session Paris, 30 November to 11 December 2015, “Adoption of the Paris Agreement”.

    Google Scholar 

  • Victor, D. (2008) On the regulation of geoengineering. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 24(2), 322–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Victor, D., Morgan, G., Apt, J., Steinbruner, J., Ricke, K. (2009) The Geoengineering Option. A Last Resort Against Global Warming? Foreign Affairs, March/April 2009, 64–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • WBGU (Wissenschaftlicher Beirat der Bundesregierung Globale Umweltveränderungen) (2009) Kassensturz für den Weltklimavertrag – Der Budget-ansatz, Sondergutachten, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Kiel, Deutschland

    Konrad Ott

Authors
  1. Konrad Ott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Konrad Ott .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. FB Ingenieurwissenschaften, Hochschule Nordhausen, Nordhausen, Thüringen, Germany

    Uta Breuer

  2. FB Ingenieurwissenschaften, Hochschule Nordhausen, Nordhausen, Germany

    Dieter D. Genske

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ott, K. (2021). Domänen der Klimaethik, ein neuer Blick – Domains of Climate Ethics Revisited. In: Breuer, U., Genske, D.D. (eds) Ethik in den Ingenieurwissenschaften. Springer, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-29476-2_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation