IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlawss/v4y2015i3p638-653d56307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Polluter-Pays-Principle: The Cardinal Instrument for Addressing Climate Change

Author

Listed:
  • Mizan R. Khan

    (Department of Environmental Science and Management, North South University, Bashundhara, Dhaka 1229, Bangladesh)

Abstract

This article traces the evolution of polluter-pays-principle (PPP) as an economic, ethical and legal instrument and argues that it has the potential of effecting global responsibility for adaptation and mitigation and for generating reliable funding for the purpose. However, the contradiction is that while it rests on neoliberal market principles, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change did not include the PPP as its provision though the principle of “common but differentiated responsibility based on respective capabilities” (Article 3.1) implicitly recognizes this. The article raises the basic question that under a free-market global system: why should the polluters not take responsibility of their actions so that the global society does not suffer? The Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries apply this PPP in many of its forms. Some developing countries are also applying it albeit still more as a governmental rather than polluter responsibility. Currently there is an emerging consensus that a carbon tax should be applied globally to address the intractable problem of climate change. Since the problem relates to a global commons, the issue is how to apply the PPP globally yet equitably. This article brings in Caney’s proposal that as complementary to the PPP. The “ability to pay principle” (APP) can take care of emissions of the past agreed by the Parties and current and future legitimate emissions of the disadvantaged countries and groups of people. He calls the latter poverty-sensitive PPP. While PPP is primarily a market principle, APP is a principle of justice and equity. That polluters should pay the social and environmental costs of their pollution reflects the most fundamental principles of justice and responsibility.

Suggested Citation

  • Mizan R. Khan, 2015. "Polluter-Pays-Principle: The Cardinal Instrument for Addressing Climate Change," Laws, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-16, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlawss:v:4:y:2015:i:3:p:638-653:d:56307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/4/3/638/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/4/3/638/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aviel Verbruggen, 2011. "Preparing the design of robust climate policy architectures," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 275-295, November.
    2. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    3. Luppi, Barbara & Parisi, Francesco & Rajagopalan, Shruti, 2012. "The rise and fall of the polluter-pays principle in developing countries," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 135-144.
    4. Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh (ed.), 1999. "Handbook of Environmental and Resource Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 801.
    5. Sam Hill, 2013. "Reforms for a Cleaner, Healthier Environment in China," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1045, OECD Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Guoyu Wang & Jinsheng Zhou, 2022. "Multiobjective Optimization of Carbon Emission Reduction Responsibility Allocation in the Open-Pit Mine Production Process against the Background of Peak Carbon Dioxide Emissions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-21, August.
    2. Kevin Grecksch & Carola Klöck, 2020. "Access and allocation in climate change adaptation," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 271-286, June.
    3. Mizan Khan & Stacy-ann Robinson & Romain Weikmans & David Ciplet & J. Timmons Roberts, 2020. "Twenty-five years of adaptation finance through a climate justice lens," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 161(2), pages 251-269, July.
    4. Kevin Grecksch & Carola Klöck, 0. "Access and allocation in climate change adaptation," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-16.
    5. Mizan R. Khan & Sirazoom Munira, 2021. "Climate change adaptation as a global public good: implications for financing," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-18, August.
    6. Daniela Cordova-Pizarro & Ismael Aguilar-Barajas & David Romero & Ciro A. Rodriguez, 2019. "Circular Economy in the Electronic Products Sector: Material Flow Analysis and Economic Impact of Cellphone E-Waste in Mexico," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-18, March.
    7. Tomas Ekvall & Martin Hirschnitz-Garbers & Fabio Eboli & Aleksander Śniegocki, 2016. "A Systemic and Systematic Approach to the Development of a Policy Mix for Material Resource Efficiency," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-26, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nunes, P.A.L.D. & Nijkamp, P., 2011. "Biodiversity: Economic perspectives," Serie Research Memoranda 0002, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    2. Caiado, Nathália & Guarnieri, Patricia & Xavier, Lúcia Helena & de Lorena Diniz Chaves, Gisele, 2017. "A characterization of the Brazilian market of reverse logistic credits (RLC) and an analogy with the existing carbon credit market," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 47-59.
    3. Primmer, Eeva & Kyllonen, Simo, 2006. "Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(8), pages 838-853, November.
    4. Bohringer, Christoph & Loschel, Andreas, 2006. "Computable general equilibrium models for sustainability impact assessment: Status quo and prospects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 49-64, November.
    5. Nicky R. M. Pouw & Hans-Peter Weikard & Richard B. Howarth, 2022. "Economic analysis of international environmental agreements: lessons learnt 2000–2020," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 279-294, June.
    6. Emilio Padilla, 2002. "Limitations and biases of conventional analysis of climate change. Towards an analysis coherent with sustainable development," Working Papers wp0206, Department of Applied Economics at Universitat Autonoma of Barcelona.
    7. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & de Groot, Rudolf & Lomas, Pedro L. & Montes, Carlos, 2010. "The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1209-1218, April.
    8. Lenzen, Manfred & Dey, Christopher J. & Murray, Shauna A., 2004. "Historical accountability and cumulative impacts: the treatment of time in corporate sustainability reporting," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(3-4), pages 237-250, December.
    9. Michael Pflüger & Jens Südekum, 2005. "Die Neue Ökonomische Geographie und Effizienzgründe für Regionalpolitik," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 74(1), pages 26-46.
    10. Button, Kenneth, 2003. "The potential of meta-analysis and value transfers as part of airport environmental appraisal," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 167-176.
    11. Edward B. Barbier, 2003. "The Role of Natural Resources in Economic Development," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 253-272, June.
    12. Barbier,Edward B., 2007. "Natural Resources and Economic Development," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521706513.
    13. Zwane, Alix Peterson, 2007. "Does poverty constrain deforestation? Econometric evidence from Peru," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 330-349, September.
    14. Szántó, Richárd, 2012. "Több szempontú részvételi döntések a fenntarthatósági értékelésekben. A legnépszerűbb módszerek összehasonlítása [Participatory multi-criteria decision analysis. A comparison of methodologies]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(12), pages 1336-1355.
    15. Cyrus Chu, C.Y. & Lai, Ching-Chong & Liao, Chih-Hsing, 2014. "How could the non-sustainable Easter Island have been sustained?," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 161-174.
    16. Hubacek, Klaus & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2006. "Changing concepts of 'land' in economic theory: From single to multi-disciplinary approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 5-27, January.
    17. Brigitte Hoogendoorn & Peter Zwan & Roy Thurik, 2019. "Sustainable Entrepreneurship: The Role of Perceived Barriers and Risk," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 157(4), pages 1133-1154, July.
    18. Edward Barbier, 2011. "The policy challenges for green economy and sustainable economic development," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 35(3), pages 233-245, August.
    19. Mauerhofer, Volker, 2008. "3-D Sustainability: An approach for priority setting in situation of conflicting interests towards a Sustainable Development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 496-506, January.
    20. Christoph Böhringer & Andreas Löschel, 2004. "Die Messung nachhaltiger Entwicklung mithilfe numerischer Gleichgewichtsmodelle," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 73(1), pages 31-52.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlawss:v:4:y:2015:i:3:p:638-653:d:56307. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.