Prospects for the Debate: Endless Recycling of Arguments or Movement towards Agreement?

Even at the relatively heady time surrounding the Rio environmental agreements in 1992, dissident voices could be heard. Indeed all the arguments that have both promoted and retarded ‘coming to agreement’ were present at that time: arguments about the science and the seriousness of climate change, who is to blame and who should pay for mitigation and adaptation, domination and inequality, and the deep distrust of modernity and modern solutions as opposed to rethinking human relationships with nature.