Climate mitigation – just, legitimate and politically feasible?

The project aims to examine the political feasibility of climate mitigation. What does “politically feasible” mean and what are the factors involved? 

In the light of the global community’s failed attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, growing doubts are being expressed about whether the UN target of restricting global warming to 1.5, well under 2, degrees is feasible. The answer largely depends on what we mean by “feasible”. The feasibility of climate mitigation is determined not only by technological constraints but even more by political conditions and realities. This applies particularly to the demand-side measures that currently offer the greatest potential for rapid emission reductions. Demand-side climate mitigation requires major societal and lifestyle changes and therefore often provokes political opposition.

The researchers in the project, headed by Naima Chahboun, see two fundamental problems with the way earlier research has approached the issue. The first is that the term “political feasibility” is severely undertheorized and is often confused with economic or technological feasibility. The second problem is the widely held, but rarely defended, belief that political feasibility is dependent on normative values such as justice and legitimacy. Whereas political theorists and philosophers often assume that climate targets can be achieved only at the expense of those values, there is a widely-held view among researchers in the social sciences that justice and legitimacy increase the feasibility of achieving climate targets.

The researchers plan to study the relationship between political feasibility and justice and legitimacy, respectively, in three stages. First of all, they will analyze what “political feasibility” entails in relation to climate mitigation. Their analysis will take into account specific political phenomena, such as ideological conflicts, institutional constraints and limited motivation among the general public. 

Secondly, the project team will devclop a theoretical framework to analyze conflicts and interactions between political feasibility on the one hand, and justice and legitimacy, respectively on the other. The framework will identify potential conflicts between political feasibility and justice/legitimacy and set normative criteria for making trade-offs between these objectives. 

Thirdly, the team will apply the theoretical framework to current conflicts caused by demand-side climate mitigation. The aim is for the framework to be used as a basis for policy recommendations that can result in normatively well-founded decisions in these cases.

The findings are expected to deepen our knowledge about the political feasibility of climate mitigation, to give researchers and decision makers new tools to evaluate and compare policy proposals, and to enhance our understanding of potential value conflicts in this field. As the pace of climate mitigation accelerates in the years to come, we shall expect a growing number of conflicts to arise.