On cascading biases against poorer countries in Robiou du Pont et al.. Correspondence to Nature Climate Change

Sivan Kartha,Tom Athanasiou,Simon Caney,Elizabeth Cripps,Kate Dooley,Navroz K. Dubash,Teng Fei,Paul G. Harris,Christian Holz,Darrel Moellendorf,Bård Lahn,Benito Müller,J. Timmons Roberts,Ambuj Sagar,Henry Shue,Peter Singer,Harald Winkler
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3022357
2017-01-01
Abstract:The recent article by Robiou du Pont et al makes counter-intuitive claims about the degree to which different countries’ pledged mitigation contributions under the Paris Agreement are “equitable”, i.e., whether they meet benchmarks associate with various equity approaches. The analysis is flawed however, in three ways, with a cascading and systematic bias against poorer and lower-emitting countries. Firstly, the methodology is heavily driven by “grandfathering” as an allocation approach, despite the absence of any ethical justification. Second, it omits “Responsibility” as a basis, without explanation, even though it is included in the set of categories (taken from the IPCC AR5) within which the authors claim to be working. And third, the IPCC raised several other ethical considerations not covered by the authors’ particular choice of categories. Each of these three analytical shortcomings biases the results in favor of the wealthier and higher-emitting countries.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?