1.

Record Nr.

UNINA9910780924503321

Autore

Davidson Marc David

Titolo

Arguing about climate change [[electronic resource] ] : judging the handling of climate risk to future generations by comparison to the general standards of conduct in the case of risk to contemporaries / / Marc David Davidson

Pubbl/distr/stampa

Amsterdam, : Amsterdam University Press, c2008

ISBN

1-282-45384-X

9786612453847

90-485-0834-7

Descrizione fisica

1 online resource (148 p.)

Disciplina

350

363.738/74

Soggetti

Environmental ethics

Climatic changes - Moral and ethical aspects

Environmental responsibility

Lingua di pubblicazione

Inglese

Formato

Materiale a stampa

Livello bibliografico

Monografia

Note generali

The work was "financed by the Dutch Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) in the context of the programme Ethics, Research & Public Policy, and the Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM)."

Originally presented as the author's Ph.D Thesis from the University of Amsterdam.

Nota di bibliografia

Includes bibliographical references.

Nota di contenuto

Contents; General introduction; Chapter 1: An inconvenient truth; Chapter 2: Climate damage as wrongful harm to future generations; Chapter 3: Regulation of climate change and the reasonable man standard; Chapter 4: A social discount rate for climate damage to future generations based on regulatory law; Chapter 5: How reasonable man discounts climate damage; Chapter 6: Parallels in reactionary argumentation in the US congressional debates on the abolition of slavery and the Kyoto Protocol; Summary; Nederlandse samenvatting; Acknowledgements; Curriculum vitae

Sommario/riassunto

Intergenerational justice requires that climate risks to future generations be handled with the same reasonable care deemed



acceptable by society in the case of risks to contemporaries. Such general standards of conduct are laid down in tort law, for example. Consequently, the validity of arguments for or against more stringent climate policy can be judged by comparison to the general standards of conduct applying in the case of risk to contemporaries. That this consistency test is able to disqualify certain arguments in the climate debate is illustrated by a further investigation of the debat