Climate Change, by Anda Stancu Climate Change-1 | Page 7

with it.” (ibid., p.14). Knight believes that his approach, contrary to Caney’s,
has more relevant moral considerations.
These alternative approaches offer a deeper understanding of the first two
principles. However, in terms of which alternative approach I think is more just,
I will go with Caney’s ‘hybrid view’.
V.
Justice of Distribution
With regard to justice for the distribution of responsibilities for tackling climate
change, we must look at both wealthy and poor countries and at their incentive
for a just cooperation. Wealthy states have rarely asked for cooperation from
poor nations, that is why unequal terms have always existed between them, until
wealthy countries realized that they are making the greatest contribution to
climate change. What these wealthy nations want now is that the developing
countries to avoid doing the same mistakes they made. (Shue, 1999, p.531) The
only problem is that by doing so, they became wealthy; meaning that if
developing nations stop doing what the developed nations did, it would impede
them from growing their economy. However, if under-developing countries will
follow the developed countries’ example, they will be contributing more to
climate change. The best and the fairest solution to this issue is if rich nations
cooperate on equitable terms with the poor nations, in a manner that benefits
both the poor nations’ economic growth and the environment. (ibid.)
Subsequently, we must take into consideration the future generations as well. It
is clear that the present generation is the only one that can tackle climate