PROHIBLUX · Should we prohibit luxury emissions of greenhouse gases, on top of price constraints?

Should we prohibit luxury emissions of greenhouse gases, on top of price constraints?

Many people intuitively feel that some greenhouse gas emissions produced by the very rich are morally problematic and should be curbed. This includes emissions from private jets, superyachts, large mansions and high-emission road vehicles. While this issue may seem especially urgent at first given the calls from the scientific community for governments to take more ambitious climate action, robust ethical arguments are needed to distinguish high-wealth emissions from all other types of emissions and target them with strong policy measures. So far, the literature on climate justice has focused on distinguishing between subsistence and luxury emissions. Subsistence emissions are defined as those that serve to satisfy basic needs and/or enable a decent standard of living to be achieved. In contrast, luxury emissions are broadly defined as all emissions that do not count as subsistence. This distinction has primarily been used to justify a right to subsistence emissions rather than to provide arguments against luxury emissions or a subcategory thereof. The PROHIBLUX project focuses on the ethics of the luxury emissions of the very rich, with three main objectives. Firstly, the project explores what could justify climate policies that treat the luxury emissions of the very rich differently from everyone else's emissions, based on qualitative rather than just quantitative reasons. For example, it seeks to explain why producing a certain amount of emissions by private jet is more problematic from a moral standpoint than producing the same amount of emissions by scheduled flights. Secondly, the project investigates which climate policies, or combination of policies, could curb high-wealth emissions in a way that is fair to all stakeholders in the luxury industry, including workers, investors, and consumers. Thirdly, the project examines whether extensive participation in carbon-intensive luxury activities by the very rich has any special implications for the fair distribution of the costs of global climate action, including mitigation, adaptation, and compensation. This affects, among other things, who should be responsible for mobilising international climate finance — that is, cross-border public finance for climate action on more or less concessional terms.

Data: CORDIS, © European Union