Any national ghg emissions reduction commitment is implicitly a position on two ethical questions, namely, first, what safe atmospheric ghg concentration level the commitment is designed to achieve and, second,
what equity framework or principles of distributive justice the INDC is based on.
Although reasonable people may disagree
what equity framework is just, nations should be expected to expressly specify the equity framework or principles of distributive justice they used in determining their INDC so that citizens around the world can evaluate claims about fairness made by a nation in setting its INDC.
Any national ghg emissions reduction commitment is implicitly a position on two ethical questions, namely, first, what safe atmospheric ghg concentration level the commitment aims to achieve and, second,
what equity framework or principles of distributive justice the percent reduction is based on.
Not exact matches
What distinguishes
Equity Literacy, broadly speaking, from these and other popular
frameworks is
Equity Literacy's recognition that the problem is not primarily cultural.
The excerpt below, taken from my recent book, Reaching and Teaching Students in Poverty: Strategies for Erasing the Opportunity Gap (Teachers College Press, 2013), describes
what I call
Equity Literacy, a
framework first used by my super-genius colleague, Katy Swalwell, to describe a kind of literacy youth should learn in school.
Although reasonable disagreements exist about
what equity and justice requires of nations in setting their INDCs as demonstrated by numerous proposed
equity frameworks discussed by the recent IPCC chapter in the 5th Assessment Report on
equity (IPCC, 2014, chapter 4), the national commitments that are based upon national economic interests alone clearly fail to pass minimum ethical scrutiny.
Yet, for the purposes of showing the utter inadequacy of existing US federal government and US state commitments, the C&C
framework is very useful because other
equity frameworks which have received some attention and respect in international discussions of
what equity requires of nations would require even steeper reductions for the US and US state governments.
Although there may be some reasonable disagreement of
what equity requires among various equitable
frameworks that have been proposed, this does not mean that any proposal for
what equity requires is entitled to respect.
Exactly
what any such
framework will entail remains to be seen but there is a good chance that it will follow a similar pattern to that of the sort of regulatory
framework we see surrounding the forex and
equities markets.