Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Improving Arguments for Local Carbon Rights

The Case of Forest‐Based Sequestration

Bibliographic Data

ID21497397
AuthorsClare Heyward (0000-0003-4099-2748, Institute for Philosophy UiT The Arctic University of Norway Tromsø Norway, corresponding author), Dominic Lenzi (0000-0003-4388-4427, Department of Philosophy (BMS) University of Twente Enschede The Netherlands)
Year2023
Volume40
Issue4
Pages593-607
Publication date2023-08-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Applied Philosophy (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0264-3758 • E-ISSN: 1468-5930
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/japp.12628
OpenAlexW4309758893
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited7

Land‐based climate mitigation schemes such as REDD+ imply the creation of ‘rights to carbon’ for actions that enhance carbon sinks. In many cases, the legal and normative foundations of such rights are unclear. This article focuses on special rights on the basis of improvement. Considering improvement in relation to carbon sinks requires asking what it means to ‘improve’ an environmental resource. Our answer departs in two significant respects from the standard conception of improvement, namely by reconceiving action in relation to ecosystem services, and accordingly, making the case for a counterfactual baseline to be used to compare an improved and unimproved state. Our modifications potentially allow for a variety of agents to claim special carbon rights on the basis of beneficial interactions with land‐based carbon sinks. We give three archetypical examples of agents who may claim pro tanto special rights to carbon based on their interaction with carbon sinks

Carbon dioxide · Carbon fibers · Carbon sequestration · Carbon sink · Climate change · Counterfactual thinking · Economics · Environmental resource management · Epistemology · Greenhouse gas · Kyoto Protocol · Law and economics · Natural resource economics · Normative · Political science · Climate Change and Geoengineering · Computer Science · Environmental law and policy · Environmental Philosophy and Ethics · Law · Philosophy · Ecology

  • Hope, Pessimism, and the Shape of a Just Climate Future

    Open Access•Dominic Lenzi•Ethics & International Affairs•2023

  • Distributive justice and the global emissions budget

    Open Access•Alexander Schulan, Lukas Tank et al.•Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews…•2023

  • Recognition in climate justice

    Open Access•Elisa Paiusco•Environmental Values•2026

  • Justice and Natural Resources

    Christine Armstrong, Chris Armstrong•Justice and Natural Resources•2017

  • Negative emissions—Part 1

    Open Access•Jan C Minx, William F Lamb et al.•Environmental Research Letters•2018

  • Glocal forest and Redd+ governance

    Open Access•Jagdish Gupta•Current Opinion in Environmental…•2012

  • Reconsidering resource rights

    Fabian Schuppert•Journal of Global Ethics•2012

  • Redduced

    Open Access•Constance L Mcdermott•Environmental Science & Policy•2012

  • Global Common Resources and the Just Distribution of Emission Shares

    Open Access•Megan Blomfield•Journal of Political Philosophy•2012

  • Human Rights Versus Emissions Rights

    Open Access•Timothy Hayward•Ethics & International Affairs•2007

Citations per year1
Citation span2023 - 2026 (4)
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae