Mitigation Policy and Practice
What Determines Investment in Renewable Energy?
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session Evelina Mengova
Investment in renewable energy is an investment in our future. However, not every country in the world spends nearly enough on environmentally sustainable energy – either because there are not enough financial resources, or because there is not enough political will in the country to do so. This research attempts to explore what are the determinants of investment in renewable energy in both developed and developing countries, and what are the major constraints each of these types of countries may face in moving towards a more environmentally friendly generation and use of energy. The paper looks for evidence whether country performance indicators (GDP, GDP per capita, FDI), together with governance indicators (Control of Corruption, Government Effectiveness, Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism, Regulatory Quality, and Rule of Law) and the current energy profile of a country have an impact on investment in clean energy.
Historical Responsibility in Climate Justice: A Response to the Non-identity Problem
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session Makoto Usami
Many authors on climate justice, most notably Henry Shue, argue that citizens in each economically advanced country have moral responsibility for the emissions of greenhouse gasses that their ancestors have made since industrial revolution occurred in the country. It is claimed that these citizens bear the obligation to undertake the extra reduction of current emissions (mitigation debt) and the duty to pay for a substantial portion of the cost of adaptation policies enacted and implemented in less developed countries (adaptation debt). Some proponents of the idea of historical responsibility invoke the polluter pays principle, presupposing that the past large emitters were morally liable. However, the PPP-based argument encounters two objections: the excusable ignorance of these emitters and the non-identity problem. Others apply the beneficiary pays principle by saying that current citizens are responsible for the past emissions because of the benefits they receive from industrialization in their society. The BPP-based argument also appears to be subject to the non-identity problem, while circumventing the ignorance objection. Despite many studies that have referred to this well-known problem, few writers explored the scope of its validity by distinguishing between mitigation debt and adaptation debt of peoples in the North. This gap in the literature is what the present paper intends to fill. After reviewing the state of the art in the study on historical responsibility, the paper seeks to show that the BPP-based justification for mitigation debt can avoid the non-identity problem, whereas such justification for adaptation debt cannot.
Navigating Spiritual Depths: The Development of an Interfaith Ocean Ethic
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session David Krantz
Scientists famously have an aversion to faith, but there may be no greater leverage point in the world than religion for scientists to utilize. An estimated 84 percent of the world’s population belongs to a spiritual faith, and many are fervent followers. Surely the success of any environmental sustainability solution for the planet will be dependent upon its adoption by people of faith. Yet the connections between religion and nature remain vastly under explored. This paper presents an event ethnography of when faith-based environmental leaders met for a week to bridge the divides between religion and science as well as between their own faiths, while delving into their own connections to nature, in order to create an interfaith ethic of the ocean. What was the result of their work? What challenges were faced in the process? And what lessons can be learned for others wishing to follow their path of interfaith cooperation on environmental issues? Research methods include document analysis, event observation and event participation.
The Swedish Debate on Climate Impact from Electric Vehicles
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session Linda Olsson
To meet the Paris agreement, CO2 emissions from road transport need to be severely lowered. In Sweden, as in many other countries, the number of electric vehicles (EVs) is increasing rapidly. This development has led to a recurring debate on whether EVs will help reduce climate impact or not. The aim of this paper is to analyze the Swedish debate on the climate impact of EVs with respect to discourse and validity of the arguments. Thirty-one opinion pieces published between 2010 and 2018 are studied using discourse analysis and a literature study. There are two discourse coalitions; supporters and opponents of EVs. The opponents’ main argument is that EVs are not carbon neutral although they lack tailpipes. Several opponents argue that EVs use imported, coal-fired electricity with high CO2 emissions. The supporters’ main argument is that EVs use Swedish, fossil-free electricity, thereby causing no CO2 emissions. Supporters also tend to emphasize new technology’s potential climate benefits. Neither coalition’s arguments are wholly valid, but nor are they wholly false. Swedish electricity production is largely fossil free, but, at times of high electricity demand, fossil-based electricity is imported. Thus, Swedish EVs often use fossil-free electricity, but sometimes they do not. Both coalitions motivate their positions with a desire to reduce climate impact. However, as the debaters generally use principles and system boundaries to suit their arguments rather than to use them properly and consequently, the debate fails to incite a more meaningful dialogue on how to meet the Paris agreement.
