Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
It is widely recognised that climate change is having malign effects on human life. How though should we evaluate these changes? The dominant approach employs cost–benefit analysis. In this essay I defend an alternative. I argue that we should see climate change as a threat to human rights. The inter-temporal character of climate change poses a second question, namely should we subject these rights to a positive discount rate. I examine five arguments which purport to show that the human rights jeopardised by dangerous climate change should be subject to a positive discount rate and conclude that none of these succeed. I argue that the rights jeopardised by dangerous climate change do not diminish in importance throughout time.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Simon Caney (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: