| Summary: | In the Kyoto round of the global warming negotiating process, justice was not a major concern. All the relevant parties shared the view that, as the agreement was binding solely for developed countries, the fair solution would be given by some form of ‘grandfathering’ (i.e. percentage reductions relative to some given emission base line). Future substantive rounds of these negotiations, however, will involve targets not only for developed but also for developing countries, and no such moral consensus is likely to be forthcoming. Considerations of justice will be a key factor in determining the feasibility of any commonly acceptable agreement that has a chance of being ratified. Indeed, given the expected disparity of positions, there will be major obstacles to finding a solution which is likely to be ratified.<br/> The aim of this study is to find a way in which this failure might nonetheless be averted. To this end, a practical method of determining concrete compromise solutions is proposed. The intention is that the procedural fairness and transparency of this method can bring the negotiating parties to see the compromise solution as sufficiently fair to be preferred to a breakdown of negotiations.
|
|---|