Does Rawls Theory of Justice still matter on a warming planet?

What is it about?

This article test, whether John Rawls ́ Theory of Justice is still relevant in a warming climate. The starting point is Finland, which is assumed as a useful example, as many social indicators suggest that Finland is close to Rawlsian egalitarian standards of distributive justice. The theory is brought to the globalized world of the 21st century, by widening the perspective from the original society level to a global level. It can be argued that economic growth in developed countries benefits people in developing countries, as we can afford to give more development aid. I argue, however, that this has not been large enough to compensate for its negative side effects, most notably that of a warming climate. Furthermore, the costs of current carbon-fueled economic growth favouring present generations in the developed countries will mainly be paid by future generations of the poor in developing countries.

Featured Image

Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

Why is it important?

I claim that economic growth cannot be taken as the ultimate policy goal. I am, however, not claiming that economic growth itself is the problem; the problems related to economic growth seems to stem from the subordination of all other policy goals to it. In the extreme case, the “social basis of self-respect” of some citizens is offered to achieve fast economic growth. Economic growth might still be a proper means, especially in poorer countries, but is not a good goal itself. The relevance of intelligently setting our goals gains further importance as we strive to drop our consumption to the level required to stay within our environmental space

Perspectives