Should we prohibit luxury emissions of greenhouse gases, on top of price constraints?

Project Information

PROHIBLUX

Grant agreement ID: 101109449

DOI

10.3030/101109449

Project closed

EC signature date 8 May 2023

Start date 1 February 2024

End date 31 January 2026

Funded under

• Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA)

Total cost

No data

EU contribution

€ 191 760,00

Coordinated by

UNIVERSITE CATHOLIQUE DE LOUVAIN
Belgium

Periodic Reporting for period 1 - PROHIBLUX (Should we prohibit luxury emissions of greenhouse gases, on top of price constraints?)

Reporting period: 2024-02-01 to 2026-01-31

Summary of the context and overall objectives of the project

Many people intuitively feel that some greenhouse gas emissions produced by the very rich are morally problematic and should be curbed. This includes emissions from private jets, superyachts, large mansions and high-emission road vehicles. While this issue may seem especially urgent at first given the calls from the scientific community for governments to take more ambitious climate action, robust ethical arguments are needed to distinguish high-wealth emissions from all other types of emissions and target them with strong policy measures. So far, the literature on climate justice has focused on distinguishing between subsistence and luxury emissions. Subsistence emissions are defined as those that serve to satisfy basic needs and/or enable a decent standard of living to be achieved. In contrast, luxury emissions are broadly defined as all emissions that do not count as subsistence. This distinction has primarily been used to justify a right to subsistence emissions rather than to provide arguments against luxury emissions or a subcategory thereof. The PROHIBLUX project focuses on the ethics of the luxury emissions of the very rich, with three main objectives. Firstly, the project explores what could justify climate policies that treat the luxury emissions of the very rich differently from everyone else's emissions, based on qualitative rather than just quantitative reasons. For example, it seeks to explain why producing a certain amount of emissions by private jet is more problematic from a moral standpoint than producing the same amount of emissions by scheduled flights. Secondly, the project investigates which climate policies, or combination of policies, could curb high-wealth emissions in a way that is fair to all stakeholders in the luxury industry, including workers, investors, and consumers. Thirdly, the project examines whether extensive participation in carbon-intensive luxury activities by the very rich has any special implications for the fair distribution of the costs of global climate action, including mitigation, adaptation, and compensation. This affects, among other things, who should be responsible for mobilising international climate finance — that is, cross-border public finance for climate action on more or less concessional terms.

Work performed from the beginning of the project to the end of the period covered by the report and main results achieved so far

The PROHIBLUX project comprises three main scientific activities. The first scientific activity involves developing a normative theory of limits on the permissible uses of sustainable emissions allowances. Adopting a specific global mitigation target means having a finite global budget for greenhouse gas emissions that is consistent with the chosen target, based on probability. The project aimed to justify an emissions ceiling for the emissions budget, distinguishing between uses of the budget that should be subject to price constraints equal for all, and those that should be the focus of special policy measures. In order to provide a robust justification for the emissions ceiling, the PROHIBLUX project had to satisfy two requirements. Firstly, it had to explain why producing a certain amount of emissions above the ceiling (e.g. by chartering a superyacht) is morally distinct from producing the same quantity of emissions below the ceiling (e.g. by taking repeated car journeys). Secondly, it had to demonstrate that producing emissions above the ceiling is morally wrong, even when equivalent carbon offsetting measures are implemented, whether nature-based or technological. Building on a theory of the just distribution of a finite emissions budget, named emissions limitarianism, and on two pro tanto arguments concerning positional consumption and moral disengagement, the project provided a justification for the emissions ceiling that satisfied both requirements. The second scientific activity takes the form of a comparative analysis of the three main policy proposals for implementing the emissions ceiling, based on both ethical considerations and feasibility constraints. The policies in question include bans, luxury carbon taxation and progressive carbon taxation. Bans prohibit the sale and/or possession of certain goods and services from a specified date onwards. Luxury carbon taxation involves a surcharge on the purchase or ownership of certain carbon-intensive luxury goods. Progressive carbon taxation is a carbon pricing system in which the tax rate on carbon emissions increases as individuals move from lower to higher emission brackets. The analysis was based on both normative and non-normative criteria. These include emissions justice, expressive justice, social efficiency, the non-frustration of legitimate expectations, administrative feasibility, and the prevention of carbon leakage. The main outcome of this analysis is a grid that evaluates the three policy instruments against each of the aforementioned criteria. The third scientific activity is an investigation into whether the fact that the very rich have consistently exceeded the emissions ceiling, coupled with their substantial financial resources, imposes additional climate justice responsibilities on them beyond those applicable to all individuals. The PROHIBLUX project supported this view by distinguishing between the weighty and frivolous interests of emitters and investors and by adopting a broad and objective conception of equal sacrifice for climate action. Furthermore, the project proposed a global policy toolbox through which countries could synchronise their efforts to ensure that the very rich fulfil their special climate responsibilities, while also preventing carbon leakage. The toolbox consists of taxes on extreme wealth, carbon taxes on the financial assets of the very rich, and carbon taxes on luxury and emission-intensive consumption.

Progress beyond the state of the art and expected potential impact (including the socio-economic impact and the wider societal implications of the project so far)

The PROHIBLUX project has produced outcomes that are both philosophical and policy-related. From a philosophical standpoint, PROHIBLUX has led to a more nuanced distinction between subsistence and luxury emissions. Within the luxury emissions category, the project has distinguished between emissions that are both linked to high wealth and superfluous to human flourishing, for which special policy measures are required, and other luxury emissions that are not inherently impermissible unless there is a shortage of sustainable emissions allowances to cover basic needs. PROHIBLUX is one of the first systematic studies of the ethics of the luxury emissions of the very rich, considered in isolation from all other types of emissions. The taxonomy of emissions developed by PROHIBLUX, along with the justice-based arguments underlying it, could help establish extreme wealth as a new area of research within climate justice. From a policy perspective, PROHIBLUX is pioneering in its comparative analysis of luxury-focused climate mitigation policies by combining normative and non-normative criteria. Furthermore, the project addresses how different countries could harmonise such policies to prevent luxury carbon leakage. This could contribute to the further development of a research strand within climate policy that has, in recent years, emphasised the impact of socio-economic inequality on the consumption of a fixed emissions budget. More empirical research is needed to assess the political feasibility of alternative luxury-focused mitigation policies and to identify the factors that could facilitate their implementation. Further analysis is also required to determine which global strategies, including the provision of negative or positive incentives, could encourage a significant number of countries to adopt a coordinated portfolio of such policies.

Landscape photo by Axel Gosseries