Towards a just implementation of carbon removal
Drawing on insights from SEI scholars, the project emphasises the importance of integrating multispecies justice and environmental integrity into CDR policies for a more equitable and sustainable transition to net-zero.
To reach stringent climate warming goals and keep the global temperature well below two degrees, we must rely on some forms of carbon removal. However, mitigation projects involving carbon dioxide removal (CDR) can considerably differ, and several techniques exist.
Prominent examples are afforestation and reforestation (AR), bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS). Each technique has unique potential, as well as costs and side effects. Ultimately, why, when and how CDR is used in the transformation to a net-zero society has fundamental implications for justice.
In this PhD project, which is part of the Ethics of Socially Disruptive Technologies Consortium (ESDiT), I investigate the societal and ethical implications of CDR in the context of sustainable development. I am particularly interested in the philosophical and political implications of extending moral consideration and justice entitlements to more-than-human entities through the capabilities approach.
During my time at SEI over the past three months, I have had the opportunity to refine my approach, which is inspired by the work of Professor and SEI director David Schlosberg. In particular, I argue that his concept of integrity of more-than-human entities is well-suited to extend the scope of justice beyond the traditional individualistic focus in climate ethics. What would CDR projects look like if they were carried out taking into account more-than-human capabilities? This question is particularly relevant now given the emergence of ‘nature-based’ CDR. These options, estimated to have tremendous mitigation potential, offer the opportunity to broaden the scope of climate justice. In particular, ‘nature-based’ solutions appear far more benign for more-than-human nature and may even reflect non-anthropocentric interests in climate justice.
The work of Professor and Deputy Director Danielle Celermajer on multispecies justice was incredibly insightful to investigate how we can bring recognition of the moral worth of more-than-human nature in CDR projects. Overall, this approach introduces new perspectives and unexplored challenges. I believe that attention to the most vulnerable - including more-than-human entities - is the first step for a just implementation of CDR. Ultimately, an ethics of CDR can depart from prevailing liberal, anthropocentric and individualistic assumptions of justice to bring recognition not only to individual animals but to systems as a whole.
The next challenge involves moving from a first-order theoretical analysis of justice and well-being to a policy analysis relevant for CDR implementation. Specifically, the next task is to illustrate how a capabilities approach would work in practice. For instance, if we recognise a forest as an entity of justice with inherent integrity whose flourishing cannot be interrupted by human intervention, what are the implications for A/R? Similarly, when looking at BECCS, how can bioenergy crops coexist with local vegetation?
I am thrilled to continue investigating these questions, bringing along the valuable insights I gained during my visiting stay at SEI.
References
Celermajer, D., Chang, D., Schlosberg, D., & Winter, C. (2024). Liberalism and the more-than-human. In D. Ivison (Ed.), Research Handbook on Liberalism (pp. 308–330). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839109034.00026
Celermajer, D., Schlosberg, D., Rickards, L., Stewart-Harawira, M., Thaler, M., Tschakert, P., Verlie, B., & Winter, C. (2021). Multispecies justice: Theories, challenges, and a research agenda for environmental politics. Environmental Politics, 30(1–2), 119–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2020.1827608
Girardin, C. A. J., Jenkins, S., Seddon, N., Allen, M., Lewis, S. L., Wheeler, C. E., Griscom, B. W., & Malhi, Y. (2021). Nature-based solutions can help cool the planet—If we act now. Nature, 593(7858), 191–194. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-01241-2
IPCC. (2022). Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157926
Schlosberg, D. (2007). Defining Environmental Justice: Theories, Movements, and Nature. OUP Oxford.
Header image Stock ID 2484408253