Emission Reductions Without Addressing Economic Inequality? Proportional Justice as a Path to a Fair Green Transition

The urgency of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 has intensified political commitments to a Green Transition. Yet, current strategies often overlook the structural links between carbon emissions and economic inequality. This paper argues that effective and fair climate action within developed liberal democracies must directly address economic disparities. I develop this claim through three main arguments. First, since the wealthiest 1% are disproportionately responsible for emissions, climate justice should shift its normative focus from the poor to the super-rich. While this resonates with emission limitarianism, its isolationist framework remains too narrow. Instead, I propose a non-monist integrationist approach that embeds climate justice within broader concerns of distributive justice. Second, extreme economic inequality erodes democratic institutions, fostering plutocratic tendencies, and also enables the super-rich to obstruct decarbonization through lobbying, litigation, and climate change denialism. Third, in developed liberal democracies, climate action centred solely on subsistence needs or poverty eradication lacks democratic legitimacy. If seen as worsening inequality, such policies face backlash. These concerns lead me to advocate for what I call the principle of proportionality, which requires that wealth and income inequalities be contained within well-defined limits. This principle offers a more viable and just framework for the Green Transition than competing distributive criteria.Keywords: Green Transition; Emission Limitarianism; Economic Limitarianism; The Principle of Proportionality.