{"title":"Some ethical considerations for South Africa's climate change mitigation approach in light of the Paris Agreement","authors":"L. Steenkamp, P. Naudé","doi":"10.15249/12-2-179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"South Africa ratified the Paris Agreement in 2016 and thereby committed to reducing Greenhouse Gas (GHG) concentration levels as part of its self-determined goals in its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). This articleviewed the targets in the NDC through an ethical lens. It was demonstrated that the commitment below the ‘business-asusual’ (BAU) level allowed for large increases in South Africa’s emissions without explaining how these were consistent with a specific understanding of what equity required. Also, the NDCtargets were found to be highly insufficient. Consequently, South Africa’s climate change mitigation commitments were deemed inconsistent with the ethical ‘no-harm’ principle.","PeriodicalId":42425,"journal":{"name":"African Journal of Business Ethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Journal of Business Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15249/12-2-179","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
South Africa ratified the Paris Agreement in 2016 and thereby committed to reducing Greenhouse Gas (GHG) concentration levels as part of its self-determined goals in its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). This articleviewed the targets in the NDC through an ethical lens. It was demonstrated that the commitment below the ‘business-asusual’ (BAU) level allowed for large increases in South Africa’s emissions without explaining how these were consistent with a specific understanding of what equity required. Also, the NDCtargets were found to be highly insufficient. Consequently, South Africa’s climate change mitigation commitments were deemed inconsistent with the ethical ‘no-harm’ principle.