This essay investigates three questions relating to Climate Justice and are as follows: To what degree ought the global warming be restricted, How ought the greenhouse gas emissions be divided and How ought the costs related to the climate change be divided. To be able to answer these questions principles of justice are needed. An argument is therefore constructed modeled after John Rawls Original Position in general and The Veil of Ignorance in particular. The conclusions from this essay are that the global temperature increase ought to be restricted to 1.5 degrees Celsius with support from Maximin as a principle of justice. As a consequent to this goal net zero emissions need to be the case as soon as possible. The remaining possible emissions ought to be divided equally with support from Maximin as a principle of justice. For the last question it is suggested that the costs ought to be paid by the ones how have emitted greenhouse gases, this according to the principle of Polluter Pays.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:umu-197410 |
| Date | January 2022 |
| Creators | Langman, Jonas |
| Publisher | Umeå universitet, Institutionen för idé- och samhällsstudier |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0024 seconds