ABSTRACT
How would agents who do not know their place in space or time articulate responsibility for climate change? Like any legitimate ethical theory, contractualism insists that people take responsibility for their actions. Distinctively, it takes it that this responsibility should be understood in terms of fairness. Carbon pollution imposes harms, and the physical and institutional momentum of climate change guarantees these harms will increase, probably more than science predicts. The central challenge is to establish international institutions that can allocate costs in proportion to responsibility: for transitioning to renewable energy, adapting to climate change, supporting victims, and mediating conflicts. This is impeded by today’s anarchic international system and resistance from interests that benefit from carbon pollution. Treating victims fairly involves resettling perhaps hundreds of millions of refugees and confronting recalcitrant governments, but this will inspire more resistance. Institutions that can allocate responsibility fairly will override many established norms, but delay only increases costs. Contractualism highlights obligations of those responsible for carbon pollution to climate victims, the magnitude and urgency of the institution-building imperative, how this threatens established normative orders, and, given the structure of incentives, how overcoming the expected resistance requires moral heroes.
