Making our children pay for mitigation

Investments in mitigating climate change have their greatest environmental impact over the long term. As a consequence the incentives to invest in cutting greenhouse gas emissions today appear to be weak. In response to this challenge, there has been increasing attention given to the idea that current generations can be motivated to start financing mitigation at much higher levels today by shifting these costs to the future through national debt. Shifting costs to the future in this way benefits future generations by break- ing existing patterns of delaying large-scale investment in low-carbon energy and efficiency. As we will see in this chapter, it does appear to be technically feasible to transfer the costs of investments made today to the future in such a way that people alive today do not incur any net cost. the aim of this chapter is to take seriously the possibility that climate change has produced an extremely intractable political problem and that we must now consider strong measures that can break existing patterns of delaying mitigation. I defend the claim that if climate change involves a stark conflict of interests between current and future generations, then borrowing from the future would be both strategically and normatively much better than the status quo. Nevertheless, I challenge the borrowing from the future proposal on the grounds that it is not in fact the powerful tool for motivating existing agents that its proponents imagine it to be. The purpose of developing this critical argument is not, however, simply to throw doubt onto the idea of borrowing from the future. If we really do find ourselves in a political context where the prospects for effective action are very poor then strategic forms of buck-passing may make an important positive contribution to avoiding dangerous global cli- mate change. Consequently, if debt financing is not as powerful of a motivational tool as imagined we still have strong reasons, I will argue, to identify other strategies that will change agents’ incentive structures. To this end, I propose an alternative form of passing on the costs of mitigation to the future that warrants consideration

A Climate of Disorder: What to do About the Obstacles to Effective Climate Politics

The emphasis on general distributive principles in the climate justice literature has left significant gaps regarding the problem of weak climate governance. The main contribution of this chapter is to show how normative theory can contribute to addressing the apparent political incapacity to respond to the threat of climate disruption. The chapter argues that a set of six underlying obstacles to effective climate change politics can serve as a framework around which ‘non-ideal’ normative theorizing about climate politics can be organized. Policies and other tactics to mediate the six obstacles are shown to raise distinct normative issues in need of deeper analysis

Medium-term health of seniors following exposure to a natural disaster

The article aims to describe the medium-term impacts of a major earthquake event (Chile, February 27, 2010) on 26 seniors. The authors adopted a qualitative study approach. Data obtained using the Impact of Event Scale–Revised (IES-R) show the presence of manifestations of posttraumatic stress in the majority of respondents. In addition, data collected in interviews demonstrated a progressive deterioration of the health of respondents over a period of 4 years following the disaster. Seniors are particularly vulnerable to the effects of material loss, emotional stress, and postdisaster health complications. These impacts are exacerbated by low economic status. Furthermore, broader research is necessary involving elderly living in poverty who have survived natural disasters and others without such experiences, in order to better identify and differentiate between health complications associated with exposure to disaster events and those linked more strictly with natural aging processes