The Climate Duties of Sub-National Political Communities
Open Access
- 20 February 2019
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Political Studies
- Vol. 68 (1) , 20-36
Abstract
In recent years, several actors at the sub-national level (e.g. California, British Columbia, New York City) have taken unilateral steps to mitigate climate change by reducing their emissions. These developments have commanded considerable attention in the empirical literature. In this piece, we consider the philosophical dimensions of climate action at the sub-national level. Specifically, we argue that climate action at the sub-national level is an instance of a more general class of cases in which the failure of some collective agent to discharge some duty to which it is subject entails duties for the sub-collectives of which it is comprised to partially discharge that duty. We begin, then, with a discussion of such cases, and a defence of the devolution principle, which sets out conditions under which such duties arise. We then set out the argument with respect to sub-national political communities’ duties to take action on climate change, specifically. The article concludes by considering complications arising out of the inevitable fact of partial compliance, drawing upon recent work in the literature on slack-taking duties.Keywords
This publication has 39 references indexed in Scilit:
- Climatic Justice and The Fair Distribution of Atmospheric Burdens: A Conjunctive AccountThe Monist, 2011
- Trade, technology, and the environment: Does access to technology promote environmental regulation?Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2011
- Cities and the Governing of Climate ChangeAnnual Review of Environment and Resources, 2010
- Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental changeGlobal Environmental Change, 2010
- Climate change and the duties of the advantagedCritical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 2010
- Assessing dangerous climate change through an update of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “reasons for concern”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2009
- International innovation and diffusion of air pollution control technologies: the effects of NOX and SO2 regulation in the US, Japan, and GermanyJournal of Environmental Economics and Management, 2006
- Cosmopolitan Justice, Responsibility, and Global Climate ChangeLeiden Journal of International Law, 2005
- Justification and LegitimacyEthics, 1999
- International Norm Dynamics and Political ChangeInternational Organization, 1998